@urchaidh yes - shopkeeper wants to park outside so doesn’t want customers doing that
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!
Today's Nick Cook frothing
(453 posts)-
Posted 3 years ago #
-
I know one shop owner in Morningside – there are probably others similar – who doesn't live in Edinburgh, let alone Morningside, and they prefer to drive instead of taking the train to Waverley and then a bus, in order to open up in time. I don't know where they park.
If only there was a way to get lots of people quickly from Waverley to the very epicentre of Morningside.
Posted 3 years ago # -
I've been contemplating the current opposition that we see all over the place to anything which changes the status of the private car in its complete domination of our cities, and I find myself concluding this:
I think that the important thing to remember is that this isn't a right-wing left-wing thing. There are plenty of other politicians, from across the political spectrum, who do this too (elsewhere)... it's populism, pure and simple. Any big change will upset some people - any big change disadvantages or scares some people (often people who have been unfairly advantaged, even just a tiny tiny bit) - and there will always be votes in being against the change... whatever that change is. This, to my mind, is the most destructive and negative of political forces.
Pick a positive change, look back over hundreds of years of history, and there's always someone standing up for the way things were, no matter how wrong the old ways are. The sad thing is that it's effective - so many people are taken in. Once the change is made nobody would, after a few years, dream of going back to how things were, but that's not the point.
And of course what the populist says needn't make any sense at all to be effective. Logic and reason aren't necessary to win at this game. You just need to speak to fear and mistrust, and to be good at gathering and stoking that fear and mistrust. It's essentially all about us and them, speaking up for 'us' because of a fear of 'them'. Scapegoating. Blaming. Pointing the finger.
Our friend who was key in opposing the idea of a cycle track through Roseburn seemed to manage to persuade some of the shopkeepers there of the most crazy of ideas... some of them understood that some kind of wall was to be built down the middle of the road, and of course that would have been a terrible idea. But built on an existing set of prejudices people were prepared to believe the most silly stuff, because they were scared.
Here's what I think is then an interesting question. If logic and reason aren't useful tools when dealing with politicians like this, what are useful tools we can use instead? Because the thing is, even trying to deal with a populist using logical argument surely bolsters their standing. It makes it appear as if they are actually defending a logical and positive point of view. The audience doesn't need to understand the point of view that the populist puts forward, Those people who are afraid of whatever it is that they are afraid of, noticing that the populist has riled up the people they are afraid of, become all the more convinced that the populist is on their side, and that he/she has made a valid point. Logic doesn't come into it.
So what's a better tactic?
Would it, perhaps, be better just to ignore them? Or at least not to reply in public? And perhaps one of our most positive tactics is to be nice people - not in dealing directly with the populist, but in dealing with the issue within the community itself.
I know of shops that took down there banners on Roseburn when one customer simply had a friendly conversation with them about nothing in particular, pointed out that they used a bicycle, that they were a bit puzzled to see the banner, and that there was to be no wall built.
Rambling now, he wound me up and this seemed a better place to reply than to engage, for all the reasons above.....
Feel free to tell me this is all nonsense...
Posted 3 years ago # -
By the way, referring back up this thread, does anyone else conclude that 'The Central Scrutiniser' '@Central00154724' is a re-brand of 'Phil' '@Phil66592' on Twitter. He/she (or the group or seems to spout the same kind of aggressive nonsense, one moment reasonable, the next completely off the wall.
Posted 3 years ago # -
@rbrtwtmn - Central Scrutiniser is the new account of the guy who was sending racist abuse to Daisy Narayanan. “Phil” has had a few new accounts: the last of his I blocked was called Edinburgh Record or similar.
Posted 3 years ago # -
@rbrtwtmn, Stickman, yes, I would agree. My Twitter block finger has been busy of late.
Posted 3 years ago # -
@rbrtwtmn I don't believe they're the same as rather amusingly I saw them and 'Phil' have an argument about a close pass on 'Phil'.
Not worth wasting your oxygen on either of them of course unless you want a laugh.
Posted 3 years ago # -
The analysis of car centric countries must include the major influence of petrochemical companies and car manufacturers on manipulating our society
Was cycling with a Tesla owner (bought before lockdown) his is an alternative view of the future
Posted 3 years ago # -
@rbrtwtmn
We should dissect the anatomy of successful campaigns. Smoking ban, leaded petrol, gay rights.
Also note that the biggest gains have come from massive disruption - universal suffrage, national public infrastructure, the NHS and social security came from World Wars and the Great Depression.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Smoking ban was ultimately about politicians being brave - after years of evidence and campaign groups especially (locally) ASH Scotland.
Lead had a strong campaign (CLEAR) in the UK led by Des Wilson by then with a slightly ajar door.
LOTS here -
“
This chapter addresses the widespread use of lead in petrol. It focuses on the period 1925–2005, when leaded petrol was first widely marketed in the US and then spread to the rest of the world before being gradually phased out from the 1970s. In Europe, the Aarhus Protocol (UNECE, 1998) initiated the phase-out of leaded petrol in the period 1998–2005.
“
Gay rights - much campaigning (particularly in US), but this was more about social change than corporate vested interests.
The ‘social’ part of opposition to driving reduction conveniently masks the corporate interests who tend to deal with Govs behind distracters like NC.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Smoking ban is good one as BAT etc hugely powerful with Ken Clarke on board etc.
Smoking Kills seems to have been accepted fact
Driving Kills - although a fact, does not seem to be accepted
Posted 3 years ago # -
‘People don’t have to smoke’
‘Everyone has to drive’
Class may be involved...
Posted 3 years ago # -
It's only at the controls of an automobile that many men feel they have any power or status at all.
There. I've said it. Let's rename cars 'ego prams'.
Posted 3 years ago # -
People don’t have to smoke
This may be true if you haven't started and haven't ever smoked.
Nicotine is highly highly addictive. They say it only takes 1 or 2 cigarettes to become hooked. Which is why Big Tobacco used to have girls handing them out for free on street corners (possibly still do in developing countries).
Note that we still see drinks companies handing out free cans of sugary water on street corners. Sugar addictive.
Driving also highly addictive. We want to, but (have so far) failed to, get rid of our car...
Posted 3 years ago # -
At the Women's Cycle Forum a few years back we heard from someone from the No More Page Three campaign as an example of a successful campaign.
Posted 3 years ago # -
@fimm, that was Ceris Aston at WCF 2015.
Posted 3 years ago # -
“
“Extinction Rebellion do not have a monopoly on civil disobedience. It’s a broad church,” he said. “Going back to suffragettes, Chartists and others. There was already mass disillusionment with the political classes before XR came along. Nothing changes without disruption. We are looking at a fusion of participatory democracy with direct action.”
“
Posted 3 years ago # -
Cllr Webber:
I know Cllr Cook is receiving f’back from many concerned businesses. Also ironic comments stating drivers have the loudest voices. Most of the time it’s the cycling lobbists that are disproportionately represented #cyclingshoeisontheothercleet“https://twitter.com/sjwebber_phw/status/1276181674989178890?s=21
Nick Cook. Golden Age. Told you.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Protecting the health of the nation during a global pandemic should be the first priority of all levels of Government. I agree that part of that is protecting our economy. The majority of people visiting our local town centres do so on foot, by bike or by bus - while a minority travel by car. Given that the carrying capacity of buses is now down to about 15% of usual, facilitating continued safe access by foot or by bike becomes even more important - in part so those that really need to use the bus are still able to do so. These are unprecedented times - difficult decisions need to be made. It makes no sense, from a public health or economic viewpoint, to favour a minority at the expense of the majority.
People can still drive and park near to local high streets - there are off-street car parks and side street parking available. The restrictions only apply to the high streets themselves.
What about disabled persons' parking? Well, the Council already say that will be protected - but remember, there is a single on-street disabled persons' parking place along the full length of Morningside Road. I haven't heard many people campaigning for more.
It is also worth remembering that over 40% of Edinburgh households do not have access to a car. Generally less well-off and older households have lower car ownership, particularly older single female households. Favouring the car at this time further disadvantages people who have already experienced the greatest burden in lockdown. People who are likely to be fearful of crowded streets - a fact acknowledged by many businesses, which have set aside special shopping times for these vulnerable groups.
Asking for streets to be made safe isn't "virtue signalling". It is done out of concern for family, neighbours and the wider community - including the business community.
I support my local businesses by spending my cash there. I will always do this, as they are a vital part of my community and many provide a great service. I won't be disappearing off to the soulless, big box out of town centres. Especially now, when local businesses most need my custom. The Council are doing the right thing by making trips to local high streets easy and safe for the most popular means of travel.
Hopefully the voice of this concerned resident, and voter, carries as much weight as that of a "concerned business".
Wow - that went on a bit. Properly riled!
Posted 3 years ago # -
Print it out and put through the doors of your favourite shops?
Posted 3 years ago # -
@Morningsider - that's 10 tweets worth of common sense! Good work. We need the space to save a rebound of CV. Allocating town centres to abandoned private property is just not going to work.
Posted 3 years ago # -
@Morningsider Excellently said. I would be curious as to what his 'councillor' response would be to that if you emailed him compared to his, err, comments on Twitter.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Thanks - as ever, if anyone wants to tweet/use this in any way then feel free. For backup:
Main modes of travel by Scottish local authority
Reduced public transport capacity due to Covid-19
Car ownership in Edinburgh (Table 4)I could dig out more (it's all correct), but really - what's the point, it's like arguing with a flange of Baboons*.
*Source - Not the Nine O'clock News
Posted 3 years ago # -
Anyone listen to the Council Meeting yesterday ?
Posted 3 years ago # -
Is it Nick implicated in today's fake news? Or his successor?
http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20194&page=21#post-332788
Posted 3 years ago # -
List of suspects are as named and maybe from same nasty party, former editor of the rag?
Posted 3 years ago # -
Nick certainly likes a bit of fake news. To him it's just a "jolly boys" game, innit?
Posted 3 years ago # -
Nick's doubling down
https://twitter.com/CllrNickCook/status/1276564011874766848?s=19
Posted 3 years ago # -
Looks like he is the front runner
Very sage advice from @Hankchief
His own party must find him an embarrassment?
Remember when politicians at least attempted gravitas?
Posted 3 years ago # -
I may have disagreed with him but I used to find him reasonable. Since he’s lost the shackles of being Transport Spokesman he’s become very hardline and objectionable.
I think he’s being groomed as a Murdo Fraser Jr - appeals to the hardcore and annoys the opponents.
Posted 3 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
