Victims of Cancel Culture?
Toronto and Ontario's Bike Lane Backlash and one Cyclist's View this is "Cancel Culture"
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.
-HL Menken
Segregated or “protected” bicycle lanes have become a hot topic in the politics in the Canadian city of Toronto. Last year during the city’s mayoral race, the approval and eventual installation of several of these projects and required the removal of general-use traffic lanes ended up being front and center of the city’s mayoral race. Mark Saunders for example promised if he were elected he’d put the Bloor Street “protected” bicycle lane project on hold, remove others such as ones installed on University Ave, and suspend any new bike lane projects. Stephen Holyday wasn’t having it either so much as making it part of a several minute conversation when he was interviewed by Jordan Peterson last year (starts at 9 min, 38 seconds). When Peterson noted that Toronto isn’t exactly the most hospitable city for cycling in winter insisting that the only people who “use bike lanes regularly are fit 20-25 year old men who actually don’t have anything better to do and that’s not a very good group of what you would call constituents to design an entire city around,” (Peterson is ignorant of bike lane ideology) Holyday replied, “the comments you just made on bike lanes might prove to be the most controversial you’ve ever made because that really gets people so irate.”
The winner of last year’s mayoral race, Olivia Chow, campaigned in support of the bike lane projects.
This controversy further expanded to the Provincial level within the past few weeks thanks to Ontario Premier Doug Ford whose described some Toronto bike lanes as “nasty and terrible” with an aim to reduce (motor) traffic congestion and gridlock (lol, good luck). Titled “The Reducing Gridlock, Saving You Time Act,” the law he proposed among many things aims to “build highways faster,” raise speed limits on provincial highways, increase broadband access to underserved areas, continue to fund and build “transit oriented communities,” fund small municipalities in their pothole repair and prevention projects, and most controversial of all - create a “new provincial approval process for the installation of new bike lanes.”
That last part, which the Association of Municipalities has deemed “significant overreach,” would require municipalities seek permission from the provincial government whenever they wanted to remove general-use traffic lanes to make room for bicycle lanes. Furthermore, municipalities would need to “demonstrate that the proposed bike lanes won’t have a negative impact on vehicle traffic.” (The lawmakers and Ford clearly don’t understand that per Ontario traffic laws, bicycles are also vehicles, but then again neither do most bike lane activists)
The backlash is predictable to those familiar with the issue. Bicycle lane activists instead of learning how to ride safely and legally tend to go out in large groups and protest whenever things don’t go their way and that they did with ride out rallies to places such as Queen’s Park where some of Toronto’s controversial bikeway projects are located. Op-eds and letter galore were published in media pieces one calling it a “war on the bike” and “dangerous.” Another deemed Toronto, as if the entire city is one large monolith, as “reacting in shock.” State media outlet CBC even attempted to conduct sort of a “fact check” of Ford’s claims. Another tried to draw parallels to Star Wars and claimed “if those lanes are removed, I could say my life and health would be more endangered.”
But it’s perhaps this one that takes the cake - an op-ed by John Swart that claims that this bikelash is really and example of “cancel culture.”
In “When cancel culture comes to bicycling” Swart begins by informing his readers he’s both a motorist and a bicyclist and tries to see all sides of the issue. He then lists several reasons this is all an example of “cancel culture” from the ability for local municipalities to design their cities as they see fit suggesting one wants a “car-centric lifestyle” while the other wants “health and lifestyle first,” to the aspirations (his words) of people who either want to save the environment or exercise. Added to this list of the cancelled are those who are “forced” for financial reasons to bike, those with some sort of disability that keeps them from getting a driving license (yes, this is a valid point), bicycle tourism, and (again with the environment) with “Cancel those that believe every small action one can take to mitigate carbon dioxide emissions will help provide our kids a better environment in the future.”
“You simply don’t matter,” he screams if you belong in one or more of these groups.
He closes with:
We will then recognize when a concept as simple as bike lanes is politically engineered to unnecessarily divide us, and call bullshit, as the devastated students at Parkland High School did almost seven years ago to politicians who had done nothing to stop the proliferation of gun violence.
This non-debate isn’t simply about bike lanes. It’s about how we choose to deal with each other, and accept that everyone whose actions are within the laws of our country has a right to their opinions and to be heard. Alienation and isolation benefit no one.
It’s time to recognize that our balanced lives are being threatened, and the responsibility is ours.
If there’s ever a thing bike lane activists are good at it’s attempting emotional manipulation to always portray themselves as Noble Victims who need “democracy” to force others, mainly what they view as “Persecutors” to see them.
Swart may very well feel as if he, other bike lane activists, and others he asserts to speak on behalf of “don’t matter,” and sadly in the cutthroat world of politics that may be true.
He and others probably don’t realize they’re fast-tracking even worse anti-cycling bikelash as the late John Finley Scott mentioned in his evergreen essay.
But this isn’t an example of “cancel culture.”
Cancel culture is having a Latino working class utility worker fired over cracking his knuckles “mistaken” for a 4chan prank.
Cancel culture is having your business virtually shutdown by woke Maoist fetishists for not saying the all the correct things per the current moment of “Progressive” orthodoxy.
Cancel culture is what right wingers did to this man over his past as a gay porn star.
Cancel culture is mobbing a woman’s place of employment over a nasty comment she made on her own time.
Cancel culture is what the corporate press hacks did to a “Karen” in Central Park, and to a group of teenage boys, or this guy who killed a pedophile and another criminal in self defense.
Or to
when he was a professor and later when he committed wrongthink about a particular country.Cancel culture is a bicycling organization acting “in the spirit of progressive, intersectional bicycle advocacy” seeking a coup within its leadership and allies to remove those who are "overwhelmingly male, white, and over the age of 60” and sensible, principled bicyclists who in their eyes “held the organization hostage.”