Road to Nowhere

1. The automobile's dominance reshaped cities at great social and environmental cost

"There is no question that the automobile was the dominant technology that 'disrupted' our society."

Automobile takeover. In the early 20th century, automobiles transformed urban mobility and spatial organization. Cities were redesigned around cars, with wide roads, highways, and sprawling suburbs. This shift prioritized individual car ownership over public transit, walking, and cycling.

Negative impacts. The mass adoption of automobiles came at an enormous cost:

• Millions of traffic deaths and injuries
• Air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions
• Loss of public space to roads and parking
• Social isolation in car-dependent suburbs
• Economic burdens of car ownership

The auto industry actively shaped this transformation through marketing, lobbying, and infrastructure demands. Alternative visions for urban mobility were sidelined in favor of auto-centric development.

2. Silicon Valley's ideology promotes technological solutions over political engagement

"The advancement of robotics, AI, and other 'futuristic' technologies has ushered in a new era in the ongoing struggle for representation of people with disabilities in large-scale decision-making settings."

Techno-solutionism. Silicon Valley's worldview, rooted in countercultural ideals and free-market economics, emphasizes technological solutions to social problems while avoiding political engagement. This "Californian Ideology" believes social change will occur through market forces and technological progress rather than collective action.

Narrow worldview. The tech industry's leaders come from privileged backgrounds, leading to "elite projection" - the assumption that their preferences and experiences are universal. This results in proposed solutions that:

• Primarily benefit wealthy tech workers
• Ignore or worsen existing inequalities
• Avoid addressing root causes of social issues
• Prioritize profit and control over public good

The tech sector's growing influence allows it to reshape cities and transportation systems according to this flawed ideology.

3. Electric vehicles fail to address fundamental problems of auto-centric transportation

"There is no such thing as an environmentally friendly automotive technology ... The social, financial, and environmental threats we now face as a result of our reliance on refined petroleum are not the fault of internal combustion technology per se but of the massive expansion of the automobile transport system."

EV limitations. While electric vehicles reduce tailpipe emissions, they fail to address core problems of auto-centric transportation:

• Inefficient use of urban space
• Traffic congestion
• Pedestrian safety risks
• Social isolation
• High infrastructure costs

New environmental concerns. EVs create new environmental and social issues:

• Increased mineral extraction for batteries
• Exploitation of workers in battery supply chains
• Perpetuation of auto-dependent urban forms
• Concentration of benefits among wealthy consumers

A truly sustainable transportation system requires reducing car dependence overall, not just changing fuel sources. Prioritizing public transit, cycling, and walkable communities would be more effective.

4. Ride-hailing services like Uber worsened traffic and exploited workers

"Uber's flooding of the market further deteriorated the conditions of workers compared to the taxi drivers' experience under the leasing model by creating an oversupply of drivers and evading the regulation of the fare."

False promises. Ride-hailing companies like Uber claimed they would reduce traffic, car ownership, and emissions. In reality, they:

• Increased congestion by adding more cars to roads
• Pulled riders from public transit
• Increased total vehicle miles traveled
• Raised emissions due to "deadheading" (driving without passengers)

Worker exploitation. Uber's business model relies on exploiting drivers:

• Classifying them as independent contractors to avoid labor protections
• Pushing costs and risks onto drivers
• Using predatory pricing to undercut taxis, then raising fares and cutting driver pay
• Resisting unionization efforts

Despite massive losses, Uber has succeeded in weakening labor protections and regulations. This threatens to create a more precarious workforce beyond just ride-hailing.

5. Self-driving car hype masked serious safety and feasibility issues

"After all the bold statements and futuristic concept art, it felt like little more than a Tesla-branded children's ride you might find at Disney World."

Overblown promises. Tech companies hyped self-driving cars as an imminent revolution that would solve traffic, safety, and environmental issues. In reality:

• Full autonomy remains elusive and may never be achievable
• Safety concerns persist, including fatal accidents
• Infrastructure and regulatory challenges are enormous
• Benefits would likely accrue mainly to wealthy users

Distraction from real solutions. The autonomous vehicle hype:

• Diverted attention and resources from proven mobility solutions like public transit
• Encouraged continued auto-centric planning
• Masked the tech industry's true goal of data collection and control

Rather than a panacea, self-driving cars risk perpetuating and worsening existing transportation problems while creating new safety and privacy concerns.

6. Proposals for flying cars and underground tunnels serve elite interests, not public good

"Musk's motivation for the Boring Company was to alleviate this traffic, but he proposed an incredibly inefficient—even unworkable—means of achieving it, and that became more apparent the more he tried to make his underground transportation system a reality."

Flawed visions. Proposals like Elon Musk's Boring Company tunnels and Uber's flying cars claim to solve urban congestion, but they:

• Ignore spatial and energy constraints
• Would serve only a wealthy minority
• Distract from more effective, egalitarian solutions

Elite escape. These concepts represent attempts by the wealthy to opt out of urban problems rather than solving them for everyone. They risk:

• Exacerbating inequality in mobility
• Wasting public resources on unproven technologies
• Perpetuating car-centric development patterns

Instead of fantastical technological fixes, addressing congestion requires reducing car dependence through improved public transit, cycling infrastructure, and urban design.

7. Micromobility and delivery robots threaten to colonize limited pedestrian space

"Adding some tunnels for cars in major cities will not alleviate traffic congestion, and Musk's plan failed to account for how few passengers the system would be able to accommodate because it was designed for cars instead of people."

Sidewalk takeover. Dockless scooters, bikes, and delivery robots are marketed as sustainable mobility solutions, but they often:

• Clutter sidewalks, impeding pedestrian movement
• Create new obstacles for people with disabilities
• Privatize public space for corporate profit

False sustainability. Many micromobility services have proved unsustainable:

• Short vehicle lifespans leading to e-waste
• Higher emissions than claimed when accounting for manufacturing and rebalancing
• Pulling riders from walking and transit rather than cars

Worker impacts. Delivery robots threaten to eliminate jobs while creating new forms of low-wage, precarious work (e.g., remote robot operators).

These technologies risk further eroding the already limited urban space for pedestrians, especially vulnerable users, while providing dubious public benefits.

8. Tech visions risk creating more unequal, surveillance-heavy, and car-dependent cities

"Instead of simply paying rent for our homes, the relationship between renter and landlord is extended to many more areas of society, creating a more explicit technological barrier to access that is designed to serve companies and their shareholders, not users, renters, or residents of cities where these systems are rolled out."

Dystopian trends. The tech industry's visions for future cities risk exacerbating existing problems:

• Increased surveillance and data collection
• Widening inequality through differential access to services
• Continued car dependence, albeit with electric and autonomous vehicles
• Privatization of public services and spaces

Loss of democracy. As more urban systems are controlled by tech companies and algorithms, citizens lose agency in shaping their communities. This could lead to:

• Reduced accountability
• Difficulty challenging corporate power
• Erosion of public space and commons

Instead of empowering residents, these visions often serve to increase corporate control and profit extraction from urban life.

9. Transformative change requires challenging capitalist structures, not just adding technology

"Building better cities requires taking housing, transport, and other essential services out of the market altogether, and running them as public services with democratic accountability."

Systemic change needed. Truly addressing urban and transportation challenges requires more than technological fixes. It demands:

• Challenging the profit motive in essential services
• Democratizing decision-making about urban development
• Prioritizing public good over private interests

Beyond tech solutions. While technology can play a role, it must be:

• Developed to serve community needs, not corporate profits
• Implemented with democratic oversight and control
• Part of broader systemic changes in economic and social relations

Transformative urban change requires political engagement and collective action, not just innovative products or apps.

10. Public transit, walking, and cycling should be prioritized over private vehicles

"An expanded system of public transit should not be technocratically planned by a group of enlightened experts; rather it must be informed by the very people whose lives it is supposed to be improving to ensure schedules, services, and facilities reflect their needs."

Sustainable mobility. To create more equitable, sustainable cities, planners should prioritize:

• Frequent, affordable public transit
• Safe, extensive cycling infrastructure
• Walkable neighborhoods with essential services nearby
• Car-free zones in urban centers

Benefits. This shift would:

• Reduce emissions and air pollution
• Improve public health through active transportation
• Increase social connection and community cohesion
• Free up urban space for housing, parks, and public use
• Provide more equitable access to mobility

Achieving this requires reallocating road space, ending subsidies for driving, and investing heavily in alternatives to private cars.

11. Democratic planning and public ownership are key to equitable, sustainable mobility

"We need to stop being distracted by the Hyperloops and the Boring Companies designed to stifle investment in trains and transit; the on-demand services that decimate workers' rights in service of convenience; and the electric sports cars and SUVs that promise a green future while driving a new wave of neo-colonial exploitation."

Public control. To create truly equitable and sustainable transportation systems:

• Essential services should be publicly owned and operated
• Planning should involve meaningful community input
• Technology should serve public needs, not corporate profits

Resisting corporate influence. This approach requires:

• Challenging tech industry narratives about inevitable disruption
• Rejecting public-private partnerships that privatize profits and socialize risks
• Building popular movements to demand transformative change

By reclaiming democratic control over urban development and mobility, cities can create systems that serve all residents, not just the wealthy and powerful.

Last updated: November 19, 2024