Two-wheeled fascism: the trouble with London's cyclists
-
By Michael Hodges
Updated: Thu Jul 30 2009 -
Time Out columnist Michael Hodges goes on the offensive against dangerous London cyclists. Have your say on the issues and read other responses and comments
What you said | Have your say
A very aggrieved cyclist turned up on BBC Radio 4 last week. He was upset about London cyclist deaths, in particular the number of cyclists killed by lorries that turn left at junctions and fail to see riders who are often trapped between the vehicles and safety railings against which, with woeful irony, they are crushed.
This is an extremely dangerous situation that should be stopped but, as well as being outraged by it, the man was clearly dangerous himself. In a tremulous, public-school voice on the edge, it seemed, of tears, he openly admitted that he ignored traffic signals: ‘It doesn't matter if the light is red or not, I’m just bothered about seeing a space in the traffic ahead and slipping in to it.’ Feature continuesAdvertisementThis neatly turned what was his and other cyclists’ problem into our problem. And by ‘our’ I mean the great majority of us who attempt to walk around the city every day and don’t want to be hit by cyclists ignoring red lights. The man could make his outrageous admission so easily because, in his and other cyclists’ world view, plebs who walk don’t matter. We are mere obstacles in the way of the divine right of an athletic, clean-living few to cycle wherever they want.
In the past, cyclists would at least be shame-faced enough about their aggression to lie: ‘Bikes are allowed on the pavement’; ‘we’re being forced on the path by the roadworks.’ Or they would blame us for being on the pavement in the first place: ‘The pavement doesn’t belong to pedestrians, it’s ours as well’ (well, yes it does, actually, and no it isn’t).
But now the London cycling community – privileged, white, self-absorbed and arrogant – can’t be bothered to make stuff up any more and is taking to the airwaves to encourage its members to break the law (and just to be clear, it is against the law to deliberately ride through a red light).
The arrogance of London’s rogue cyclists is as extreme as their appearance. Go to the website of the London Cycling Campaign (www.lcc.org.uk) and on the homepage you’ll find a picture of a grown man in a yellow anorak and tights riding his cycle across the pavement.
He’s coming up behind a lumpy male pedestrian in a baseball cap who has no way of knowing the cyclist is behind him because cyclists – around the time they started to dress in leotards and Waffen SS helmets – abandoned the traditional, and useful if you’re going to drive through a group of people, bell.
Lumpy men in baseball caps are ridiculous, laughable even, but not having thunderous thighs and a cagoule doesn’t justify physical assault. Yet. The worship of the (white) male human body, the disdain for the lower orders, the generally humourless attitude (seen any laughing cyclists recently?), we’ve been here before haven’t we? In fact we fought a war to stop it. Did London survive the attentions of the Luftwaffe only to be overrun by a new pack of two-wheeled fascists?
The original London fascists, Mosley’s blackshirts, survived on handouts from the aristocracy but modern pedestrian-hating cycling groups are allowed to register as a charities (the LCC is Registered Charity number 1115789). Worse, the government actually gives our money to the new fascists; funding for cycling has doubled in the last two years and there is now a Cycle to Work scheme to provide VAT-free bicycles. Why should pedestrians’ taxes pay to put more cyclists on our paths and support organisations committed to making our lives harder?
LCC has direct links with Sustrans, a group that is dedicated to turning country lanes into cycleways, forcing the ordinary hikers that traditionally use them out of the way. If successful, Sustrans’ s campaign will undo the radical work of the last century when mass trespasses won ordinary people access to the countryside. Quiet lanes and tracks where women, children and pensioners can dawdle along enjoying the flora and fauna would become noisy cycleways plagued by mountain bikes and bellowing male riders in neon body stockings.
In town and country then, the pedestrian is under assault from cyclists. Given the ferocity of the assault, letting tyres down and bending mudguards whenever the opportunity arises doesn’t seem an adequate response any more. So what are we going to do about the new fascists?- Add your comment to this feature
|
|
More ways to enjoy Time Out
-
Weekly London newsletter
The best of London in your inbox
-
Time Out Widgets
|
|
77 comments
Afraid of aggressive, threatening cyclists?
Stop moaning - and carry a stick to fend them off!
Use your civil right to self-protection!!
"Change the law so that cyclists only have to give way at lights, just like pedestrians, rather than stop like motor vehicles.
As long as they do give way, is there any harm done to anyone?"
Quite.
What the motorist mentality will never understand is that cyclists are pedestrians in everything but speed.
They are just as vulnerable, and just as non-polluting.
And as there is no 'jaywalking' offence in Britain, meaniing that the pedestrian ALWAYS has right of way, it would be in the spirit of that law to allow cyclists the same rights on the road.
People on bikes are not vehicles, they are people.
The reality of the situation is that cycling on pavements mainly represents a glorious piece of co-operation between people, not the nightmare of paranoiacs like the writer of this piece of trash.
It is the very fact that this behaviour reveals just how peacably people can co-exist which infuriated the reactionay neurotics.
The only thing missing is a sufficient level of expertise by cyclists. This is actively discouraged by the insistence on helmets and the armchair riding style encouraged by the pernicious bloated 4x4 of bicycles, the misnamed, overspecified, overpriced mountain bike.
It's wrong to lump all cyclists in with those who ride on the pavement and skip lights - quite simply because most don't. I cycle regularly in London but just because some pedestrians walk out into the road in front of me without looking I don't tar them all with the same brush.
Just as pedestrians can feel threatened by careless cyclists, cyclists in turn can feel threatened by those motorists who have scant regard for their safety. I was assaulted in central London this month because I tapped on the window of a car that was being driven very aggressively. It's not the first time I have witnessed aggressive behaviour from motorists. However, despite requiring stitches on my face, I wouldn't ever suggest that motorists are highly-strung maniacs. The bad ones, like bad cyclists, are a minority, albeit a very dangerous one.
There's something rather sad about this article, and Michael Hodges for writing it. The comparison with fascism exposes it for the nonsense that it is. If you want a lesson from history is is that we're not going to learn to live together if we demonise people.
The increase in cycling in London seems to me to almost totally made up of pavement cyclists. Yesterday I walked home from the town centre (Barking) with a friend, a distance of 1mile.
In that mile we were passed by 12 pavement cyclists; only one went by slowly and considerately although as this was not a shared path even he had no right to be there. The others went by at speed and within inches of us. If one of has had moved out of a straight line we would have been injured.
By the time we arrived home we were exhausted, angry, upset and stressed. This is the reality of increased cyclng in London for many people. Pavement cyclists are bullies; they are brave men (11 of the 12 were men) who enjoy dominating people who are older, slower or weaker than they are and get a kick of swearing at, threatening and abusing women.
We have always walked for exercise and because we (used to) enjoy walking under the trees in the pretty street that we live in. Now we are going to have to take the bus because this problem is getting worse week on week. Who is looking after the rights of people like us?
Is this piece of garbage still milking it?
Any serious publication would have drawn a line under this thread years ago. Does Time Out still need the traffic this scrap of sneering scribble generates?
Pathetic.
"Two wheeled Facism"?!? These articles are getting ridiculous. I wish you would look at real problems and dangers on the road such as the endless number of motorists still using mobile phones while driving; speeding cars in residential areas; blaring horns left right and centre; taking red lights in cars (yes I see it every day!); agressive drivers; impatient drivers etc etc etc.
Let's compare the problems caused by motorists compared to cyclists shall we?!? Deaths? Injuries? Pollution? Noise?
Is there really a 'trouble with London's cyclists' in comparison?
How about just writing an article called 'trouble with Time Out's low quality journalism?'
Motorcyclists - take a leaf out of the cyclists' book, and use those nice cycle paths!
Why not?!
It really is a shame that ego man Hodges has to use his undeserved pedestal to exacerbate this already ugly argument and promote further intolerance on all sides. It is a great shame that there seems to be so much hatred towards cyclists in London. It is a great way to get about and I believe you can experience a true sense of freedom when cycling.
While there are probably many people who use bikes who are inconsiderate, isn't this the same with drivers, pedestrians, tube and bus users?
It would be nice to see more focus on the positive aspects of cycling, together with more education about its benefits and greater investment in proper infrastructure that would move London closer towards other cities where the urban planning has been designed to consider all road users.
I feel a lot of hatred towards the writer of this article. How ridiculous. Cycling is terrifying in London, but sometimes lovely. If people stopped driving, which there is no need to do in London, and used public transport/bikes, cyclists would be able to use the roads. I have a bell, I use it, but people still don't get out the way. However, I am patient, often get off and walk when it's busy.
As for the white male comments.
I am a black female.
And have you ever been to South London?
Bikes are not used only by white males.
Why have the cyclists got the police in their pockets?
Has money changed hands?
Is there another dripping snout in the trough?
I live on a busy but pretty tree lined street in East London and I used to like taking a walk most evenings for exercise and enjoyment but now this has been ruined by the number of aggressive, arrogant cyclists who choose to ride on the pavement.
They don't give a damn about pedestrians and if tackled about their illegal behaviour they either swear and threaten you or scream like babies about their "rights".
I am sick to death of them and even more sick of politicians prattling on about how "vulnerable" they are. How are they more vulnerable than the disabled, blind and elderly people that they intimidate?
They don't belong on the pavement and I have lost all respect for the police because they tolerate them and do nothing about it. Where I live the police will even go single file to allow cyclists past on the pavement!
Drivel. Please fire the chimp who wrote this rubbish. Glad I don't subscribe to the paper version of TimeOut. "No such thing as a free lunch" springs to mind.
All the issues raised in this article seem valid, but I am concerned that Michael feels the need to make this a race issue. With constant references to skin colour. Then going on to call cyclists facists. The guys got some valid points, but frankly Michael.. You're a moron, why bring race and fascism into a transport debate? It makes you sound like a 14-year old, and with your references to the luftwaffe I believe you have broken Godwin's law, and am amazed timeout published this s****
Cyclists feel that their machines give them some power over the pedestrians.
And we all know what happens to people who get power, don't we?
Out comes that little fascist....