A wiry thirtysomething guy bikes out of the Whole Foods parking lot, a pannier of organic produce strapped to his rack. He’s on his way home to make dinner after a couple of hours spent door-knocking for Greenpeace. He pulls into the street, pedaling quickly, but he’s not moving fast enough for a hulking SUV whose impatient driver doesn’t want to change lanes. She tailgates him for several yards, laying on the horn, then swerves into the other lane and tears past him, yelling something about getting on the sidewalk. The cyclist gives her a one-fingered salute, then notices a McCain-Palin sticker on her bumper.
Typical.
Bike commuters hit the streets in massive numbers last year, and scenarios like this one—starring the lefty cyclist and the GOP-loving driver—have been bandied about in media reports and water-cooler anecdotes. But not everyone on two wheels is out to curb climate change or stick it to the man. There are conservatives who integrate bikes into their lives just as thoroughly as their liberal counterparts do, which raises the question: Do bikes and politics really have to mix?
Mitch Berg is a conservative talk-radio host whose blog, A Shot in the Dark, is divided between political content and chronicles of his bike-commuting experiences. “I grew up in rural North Dakota, and biking was one of my escapes when I was in high school and college,” he says. “It’s my favorite way to try to stay in shape. And if gas fell to 25 cents a gallon, I’d still bike every day.”
Berg doesn’t believe there’s anything inherently political about riding a bike, and plenty of conservative pedal pushers seem to agree. “I do not care about gas prices or the environment. I care about fun and getting where I am quickly,” writes Old Scratch, a poster on Bike Forums, an Internet discussion site for all things bike related. “I find cycling to be a very conservative activity,” writes Maddyfish. “It saves me money and time.”
However, Berg says, “people on both sides of the political aisle do ascribe political significance to biking. The lifestyle-statement bikers, of course, see the act as a political and social statement. And there’s a certain strain of conservatism that sees conspicuous consumption—driving an SUV and chortling at paying more for gas—as a way to poke a finger in the eyes of the environmental left.”
Want to gain a fresh perspective? Read stories that matter? Feel optimistic about the future? It's all here! Utne Reader offers provocative writing from diverse perspectives, insightful analysis of art and media, down-to-earth news and in-depth coverage of eye-opening issues that affect your life.
bicyclists who become overly obsessed should try 12 steo meetings /Bikers Anonymous certain dudes sleepo with bikes one gal has intimate relations with cycle bike parts begin growing out of her body bike evangelists eco-nudist anarchists on wheels all appear in Prolific Playwright Larry Myers' "Bicycle Centaurs" a drama that leaves you marathon breathless
Bicycling IS a political statement, though of course the statements vary from rider to rider. For the conservative cyclist who "doesn't care about the environment," his politics are duly noted. Of course, I'd rather see someone doing the right thing even for selfish reasons, provided he wears a bike helmet.
Thank you for this. The toxic state of political discourse has thoroughly eroded words like "liberal" and "conservative." Since when are notions like frugality and healthy living NOT conservative? I particularly love the anecdote at the opening ... I couldn't count the number of times I've been cut off while cycling by an SUV with an Obama sticker on the bumper.
Thank you Alan for setting the facts straight.
@natalie Following your logic, should students who don't pay taxes have a right to public education? Even better, should courses at schools be allocated by the the amount parents pay in property taxes? I could go on. I'm sure you get the point. Public goods are for the public. We all share in the good by being a resident. Some will pay more some will pay less. Since, you are obviously old enough to navigate through the internet to get to this article, I would think you would have mastered this concept by now. No red herrings in this pond.
Roads in America were developed at the turn of the last century because of lobbying by bicycle unions, including the splendidly named League of American Wheelmen, who wanted better conditions for their members. This was, of course, back when everybody rode bicycles. Ironically, cars took over the paved bicycle roads later. As mentioned, people who choose to ride bicycles already pay for the infrastructure, as do pedestrians for the sidewalks. And the costs of building separated bike lanes and getting people to shift to the bike are quickly paid off by reduced wear and tear on the roads, less maintenence, better travel times for motorists because of reduced traffic, as well as saving money on health care because of better levels of health. And so on, and so on.
@Natalie: Most local roads (highways are irrelevant to this discussion) are paid for primarily by local sales, income, and property taxes, which cyclists pay their full share of. Data from the FHWA by way of [1] shows that "in 2002, $27.9 billion were spent on U.S. local roads, of which only $3.1 billion was from user fees." In other words, for the roads they use, cyclists and pedestrians pay more than their fair share, as they do significantly less wear to the roadways, and have far less of a negative effect on the environment both natural and built. [1]http://www.vtpi.org/whoserd.pdf
While I totally support the use of cycles as a means of staying fit and healthy, and supporting the environment. It does erk me when cyclists 'reassert' their right to use the road especially considering they're not paying road user fees to the same extent as those driving vehicles.
I love this piece. I'd also like to cite it in a paper about bicycle stereotypes, but I can't for the life of me find the volume or issue number.