Perhaps one of the most powerful political movements in bike culture today is Critical Mass. Critical Mass is an event held in urban centers worldwide, usually on the last Friday of the month, to raise awareness of the unfair (and oftentimes inhumane) treatment of cyclists, and to promote the “share the road” ideology. In a Critical Mass ride, cyclists come together to ride in high-traffic areas (where they’ll receive the most attention) often clogging motorways and preventing automotive commuters from using the roads. Critical Mass was popularized in the early 1990s in San Francisco. The first ride in New York occurred in 1993. Critical Mass is a striking example of how collective action can be used effectively to bring attention to an issue—in this case being the unequal use of motorways.
Using the sociological perspective, the Conflict theory can be imposed on the issue of Critical Mass. Conflict theory holds that social behavior is best understood in terms of conflict or tension between competing groups in society. We can broaden this assumption beyond social “classes” and apply the theory to the automotive community and the bike community. The “conflict” or tension exists in the struggle over scarce resources—the high-traffic roads that cyclists and motorists alike, wish to use.
There is an obvious tension between cyclists and automobile operators. As both a licensed driver and avid cyclist, I have experienced both roles. In a car, bikers are analogous to flies that zip in and out of traffic. They make unexpected turns and occasionally shirk the rules of the road. But as a cyclist, you feel vulnerable and empowered at the same time. Many cyclists ride for fitness and environmental reasons alike, so many feel that they should have equal, if not greater rights to the road because they are fulfilling a greater social responsibility.
But more recently, there has been increased tension between police forces and the bike community—a relationship that was once peaceful. Ever since the Republican National Convention in August 2004, “the relationship between the bicyclists and the police has been ‘antagonistic’” (Barron). On this day, Critical Mass riders voiced radical opposition to the Bush administration as they rode past, and 264 riders were arrested for disorderly conduct. Since then, police forces have tried to convince courts to outlaw Critical Mass protests, but have yet been unsuccessful. They have, however, succeeded in requiring parade permits for groups of 50 or more persons. But will the legislation be successful in preventing chaos and injury? Likely not, since, as New York Times editorial staff contends, police vehicles—scooters, vans unmarked cars and helicopters—race the wrong way on roads and on sidewalks, they pose a greater danger than bicyclists themselves.
The goal of adopting a sociological perspective is to be able to look at larger social “issues” to understand and explain the behavior of individuals on a smaller scale. Because the issue is largely the difference in values between motorists and cyclists, it will be difficult to come to a compromise. Critical Mass riders employ collective action to empower riders worldwide and show motorists that they are not vulnerable (especially not in numbers) and deserve to be treated with respect both on an off roads—this means no cutting off cyclists or driving unnaturally close. In many ways, I feel that Critical Mass has succeeded. If nothing else, three solid pages of headlines pop up when I search “Critical Mass” on the New York Times web browser. When I see article titles such as, “Manhattan: Cyclists Win Case,” “After Judge’s Ruling, Fewer Are Arrested in Mass Bike Ride,” and “Civil Liberty Assails Police Over 2004 Protests,” I can’t help but throw a silent fist-pump for cyclists all over the world. It seems that they are getting the recognition they’ve been riding for.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/04/nyregion/04critical.html
No comments:
Post a Comment