The conclusion of the above considerations, then, is that driving the automobile in the above context is a violation of civic duty. — Sha'aniah

If you don't like the way I drive, stay off of the sidewalk!

This dilemma creates a neurological state of fear vibrating in the chest caverns of all persons affected, — Sha'aniah

I know what you mean. Stay put and let the world come to you. I admire your convoluted reasoning.

Oh wait. Those coming to you will drive or walk, so staying put is not the answer. What is? :chin:

This dilemma creates a neurological state of fear vibrating in the chest caverns of all persons affected, and the consequences are hefty in the resulting creation of a bureaucratic insurance state which is, essentially, manifest desolation of the Republic. — Sha'aniah

I'm not afraid when I drive my car or walk. I think I have a pretty good understanding of the risks. I try to be careful. I think this is true for most people, so I don't see the dilemma you describe. On the other hand, there are much more significant effects of automobile use, in particular, impacts to air quality

Forgot to say - welcome to the forum.

So, by people giving up driving to walk, the community will be safer? It would reduce traffic accidents, and the roads would be clear for emergency vehicles. On the flipside, it is safer to drive through dangerous neighbourhoods.

You would still have to have a decent rail network for long distance travel, or permit driving for long distance travel (over x mile journeys), otherwise the cost to quality of life may be too great.

Evolutionary theory, over the course of hundreds of thousands of years, has implicated upon mankind a natural mandate of sorts. This natural mandate is that no man needs more than he can carry with his own two hands. How do you think the automobile was created, and what happened before? The caravan evolved over the course of a very long time, and prior to it's creation everyone supported themselves first, and the tribe was sui generis. Now, no person can support themselves without the automobile first. This violation of the natural mandate is sin, according to natural science.

The answer is a philosophy of self-contained realization, as the religion of the ancient Egyptians and then over the course of the progressive evolution of this ideal, into the new testament writings unto the philosophy of Jesus Christ.

Walking is the natural panacea. Without walking as the natural lubricant for society, there is desolation of the republic in the form of farce commerce, false livelihoods, and lack of conscientious consideration for one another. Without walking and sharing of goods and resources, everybody and their brother drives around with the cargo capacity of four horses , when he himself is non comparable to one. It causes psychic and conscientious problems due to the greed of excessive space consumed in the course of less time, and due to the harmful effects on fellow civilians in the form of pollution and bodily harm.

So because everyone is aware of the risks, it's ok to live with this dilemma. If everyone walked, there'd be no dilemma. I'm not causing any danger by walking.

There needs to be an alternative. The problem is that the economic and social domains are completely skewered into farce forms due to the constricted living space. Without being able to drive to a place of business, you would do business on your own, independently. But now people are in the business of inducting a culture into America from a foreign land due to lack of living space and conscientious application of mind to create their own culture in the street.

The Wal Mart has replaced the bazaar. The shopping aisles are supposed to be streets and the Republic churns off that.

Risks are not bad. When you swim in the ocean you risk being attacked by jaws. Every society is different. There is no one rule when it comes to safety. It's up to each society to evaluate safety for themselves. I find it meditative to be in the car while I listen to music, Napoleon Hill CDs, ect. My life is good and if other countries feel their poverty is a blessing then don't go after us for being how we are. Having cars gets people to hospitals faster as well btw

In the context of a community where there is the potential to walk to a destination or alternatively drive to a destinatio — Sha'aniah

How far do you need me to walk in this community? Do I have to walk 20 miles to get some bread or can I drive?

The West needs criticism and suggestions but saying car driving is sinful is going extreme

There is a high risk of death with atomobiles than without. The risk is death by car accident.

Without automobiles (and trucks) the transportation of food, goods, and services would be impossible on the scale that we enjoy now. Subtract all motorized vehicles from traffic, and most of the world would starve to death or die or dehydration.

Driving motorized vehicles is evil, it is a violation of the civic duty, but much less evil and much less of a violation than not driving motorized vehicles.

It is here admitted that these arguments seem to imply a degree of human evolution not yet seen in history. It is here advanced the thesis that there exists an alternative to religion and non religion, and that this alternative is needs be fleshed out in the future endeavors of humankind. The planet has been heated by several degrees because man refuses to raise his consciousness. That is the argument. In order to deal with the reality of life, it is time to embrace the methods of advancement known in monastic Buddhism, ancient Egypt, and the New Testament Christian church.

But for the American public generally, the argument is something like this. Walking five miles a day is normal, defined so by evolutionary theory. So no small community five to seven miles in diameter should need the automobile for its maintenance and thoroughgoingness. In a small community, residents are to be receptive to social cues and are to take on the role of ants, carrying and doing up the community componentially, bit by bit. Old women can carry pieces of plastic. Bicycles sometimes weigh as little as eight pounds.

It is not argued that use of highways is prohibited. Large scale logistics in the form of highway travel is not a violation of the natural mandate. The caravan can be used for highway travel. Remember the context was to develop this model for a walking town. Not a walking highway. Calling it sin is in order to implicate persons of all walks of life, such as Christians. God forbid a Christian would relinquish his keys; how would he get to church? It is sin, and Christians need to address it. And it's also sin for naturalists, who believe in evolution which was perpetuated through bi-pedalism. The word is difficult to avoid when we are trying to improve life by adhering to lofty ideals and formulated strictures for humanitarian and disciplinary reasons.

The problem of pedestrian travel versus logistical transport is to address the separation of church and state. No man needs to drive. It is a violation of civic duty. The community needs to be partitioned out according to these boundaries. There should be no driving in the town square. Colleges were developed to resemble small towns, and in the first two years on college campus one is not permitted to have a car. The town needs to be restored and people need to embrace walking as a neglected medium between men. The automobile is a carbon-emitting, steel-pod isolate. Isolate, here, is a noun. It disallows spontaneity in economics, such as walking in off the street. It separates people and the exchange of visibility is off-kilt. I get it frequently, "I saw you out walking." But I did not see you..? This is a problem in the social fabric. It is a conscientious problem, and a humanitarian one. If a person lives in one town, then I expect them to work, sleep, and fellowship there too, as well as shop. Now, excessive mobility has made it so that I work in town A, sleep at town B, and have friends and shopping in town C. That is not good social welfare, and it creates frailed, untrusted relationships. Also it puts wal mart in business instead of more small businesses.

The problem of pedestrian travel versus logistical transport is to address the separation of church and state. No man needs to drive. It is a violation of civic duty. The community needs to be partitioned out according to these boundaries. There should be no driving in the town square. Colleges were developed to resemble small towns, and in the first two years on college campus one is not permitted to have a car. The town needs to be restored and people need to embrace walking as a neglected medium between men. The automobile is a carbon-emitting, steel-pod isolate. Isolate, here, is a noun. It disallows spontaneity in economics, such as walking in off the street. It separates people and the exchange of visibility is off-kilt. I get it frequently, "I saw you out walking." But I did not see you..? This is a problem in the social fabric. It is a conscientious problem, and a humanitarian one. If a person lives in one town, then I expect them to work, sleep, and fellowship there too, as well as shop. Now, excessive mobility has made it so that I work in town A, sleep at town B, and have friends and shopping in town C. That is not good social welfare, and it creates frailed, untrusted relationships. Also it puts wal mart in business instead of more small businesses. — Sha'aniah

I wish you'd stop holding back and tell us how you REALLY feel about cars.

Less cars, more bars. Walk it off and think about what you were gonna do. C'mon, listen to reason.

No man needs to drive. It is a violation of civic duty. — Sha'aniah

For sake of conversation, would you have made the same argument in the days of the horse and buggy? Do you object to the "Surrey with a fringe on top?"

Yes each society must evaluate safety for themselves. And what I am pointing out is that due to our own psychological and nationalistic impoverishment people in this country are gravitating to their cars too much. I would understand 100 years ago. But not anymore. There simply is no sensible reason why a small community cannot be what you drive to the city to experience. Maybe back in the days when it was considerably more difficult to pass the time due to lack of available options, but with the rise of globalization it is possible for a society to be much more multi-cultural and people-oriented. You don't need to drive away anymore. Especially with the smart phone revolution and the internet. Sing in the street and stop auditioning for American Idol. People need too much money because the money is in the insurance and automobile industries, which are negated when the automobile is voided out. The lifestyle choice of driving is replaced by developing character and making more money doing whatever it is you choose to do. The automobile industry is where the surplus of funds comes from.

Maybe you find it meditative to listen to music in your car. OK? Should you have the right to pollute the air and threaten the bodily existence of other beings while you do it? I don't think you should.

Oh I wish I could be such a jester, but if you want to know what I REALLY think about cars, the UNCENSORED essay is available for viewing on Amazon.

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN BY ADAM BRUNSWICK.

Should you have the right to pollute the air and threaten the bodily existence of other beings while you do it? — Sha'aniah

To an extent, yes

When are you going to sell all your personal items and give them to poverty stricken places around the world?

Oh I wish I could be such a jester, but if you want to know what I REALLY think about cars, the UNCENSORED essay is available for viewing on Amazon.

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN BY ADAM BRUNSWICK. — Sha'aniah

For sake of conversation, would you have made the same argument in the days of the horse and buggy? Do you object to the "Surrey with a fringe on top?"

What I mean is, do you object to transportation in general? Or just internal combustion engines? If the latter, how about steam engines? Should we bring back the Stanley Steamer?

For sake of conversation, would you have made the same argument in the days of the horse and buggy? Do you object to the "Surrey with a fringe on top?" — fishfry

Indeed that is the greatest evil of the automobile, that it replaced the horse, and severed man from his natural relationship with that animal. Only vestiges of it remain, as in the term “horse-power”.

Domesticated animals used to form the bridge between us and the animal kingdom in general: horses gave us transportation, bulls served as our tractors, cows gave us milk and goats were our lawn mowers, etc. These relationships are now, of course, viewed as exploitative, as though a mere animal has the same rights as a human being, and that we were treating them inhumanely... thus the moniker, “The Humane Society”, applied not to the interrelationship b/w human beings, but to our relationship with domesticated animals.

Indeed that is the greatest evil of the automobile, that it replaced the horse — Leghorn

As I understand it, cities in the late 1800's had streets covered in horse manure and didn't smell very good in the summer. It's easy to romanticize the past but it must have been awful.

As I understand it, cities in the late 1800's had streets covered in horse manure and didn't smell very good in the summer. It's easy to romanticize the past but it must have been awful. — fishfry

Well, first of all, I’m not romanticizing the past. I’m saying that the horse served an evident purpose to mankind for millennia, and that the chief good that arose from that for us, besides the fact that we were able to transport ourselves more rapidly, was that it gave us an obvious connection to animals that we lack when they are purely wild.

As far as the repugnance of manure goes, I agree with you. I don’t doubt that cities of old hired men to clean the streets. But I also inhale a lot of repulsive fumes from diesel trucks everyday off my road, which was a very rural and bucolic one only half a century ago.

...and these same trucks are the most raucous things around here, their jake-brakes jug-jug-jug-jug-jugging down the road so loud you have to raise your voice to the level of a fundamentalist preacher to get your porch-side companion to hear it!...

...that’s what I call noise-pollution.

Lol i put my material goods at the curb and let any and all pick at them.

I dont even have electricity. You wanna hang out some time?

Come by on a saturday and if im not too drunk from wine due to sabbath ill explain how the lotus pose is ideal for a homeless man.

Please do read the essay. I tried to make it free but amazon is a business.

I understand 100 yrs ago needing a car. But not anymore. So much more is known about societal and cultural options there's no reason to drive away anymore. Each small town can be its own little city. I dont reject highway travel. Its simply neglectful to isolate yourself in a small community. Its poor application of spontaneity and person to person commerce due to how much weight and how many obligations the automobile carries. A person needs to walk in off the street, not drive there. If you drive there, you dont know them. Not the way you know them if you sleep there.

The small town now has so much potential. Yoga, martial arts, different philosophical perspectives, cuisine from all over the world. As long as we have time and space through which to do these things.

Many people try to live off the state by paying more for cars and insurance instead of eating essential and having social and dietary needs met. Then they work 60 hrs a week to afford daycare for kids they dont raise. GREAT.