Critical Mass is good, evil, or just more AstroTurf
I’ve been a full-time bicycle rider since 1973, but I’ve never been to a Critical Mass [Straight Talk, August 12-19]. When it started, it seemed obvious to me that it was AstroTurf, promoted by the auto industry. Considering its stated aims of camaraderie for the participants and showing the public how many cyclists there are, why hold it downtown on a Friday night at 6 p.m.? Wouldn’t those aims be achieved if it were held in a park on a Sunday morning at 10 a.m.?
The participants believe they are attacking the gas guzzlers’ domination of our roads. So why do the mainstream news media—relying on auto advertising for their continued existence—remind their readers of the upcoming month-end ride? If Critical Mass were a real threat, it would be ignored by the media. And the police would be told to enforce the law, not facilitate the ride.
The real aim is obvious: create maximum animosity between car drivers and bicycle riders. Once the day and time were fixed and downtown made the starting point, any city with a few angry bike riders could start its own Critical Mass ride—thus the illusion of a grassroots movement.
> Frank Daniels / Vancouver



Follow us on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Comments
Rod Smelser
Plus it's just really fun. And if it disrupts traffic once a month, and forces motorists to realize that we're not content to remain on the periphery of their awareness, then i see that as a good thing.
I think critical mass is a positive form of protest. But I do not condone the overtly confrontational attitudes that I see from some participants. Quite frankly, i've been embarrassed once or twice by the occasional delinquent whose screaming or swearing defiles what should be a peaceful and graceful protest.