this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2026
191 points (98.0% liked)

Leopards Ate My Face

10361 readers
813 users here now

Rules:

  1. The mods are fallible; if you've been banned or had a post/comment removed, please appeal.
  2. Off-topic posts will be removed. If you don't know what "Leopards ate my Face" is, try reading this post.
  3. If the reason your post meets Rule 1 isn't in the source, you must add a source in the post body (not the comments) to explain this. If the reason is in the source but is tedious to find (e.g. in a lengthy video), you must add an explanation for where it is.
  4. Posts should use high-quality sources (for a rough idea, check out this list), and posts should retain the title (if one exists) from works like news articles, videos, etc. You may (but need not) edit your post if the source changes the title. (If you're only using an excerpt from an article that's otherwise not about LAMF, you can use the quote in the title.) Other types of posts should have a title which accurately, relatively neutrally describes their contents.
  5. For accessibility reasons, an image of text must either have alt text or a transcription in the post body.
  6. Reposts within 1 year or the Top 100 of all time are subject to removal. Within moderator discretion, this doesn't just include reposts of the exact same media but also includes e.g. a secondary source telling basically the exact same story as another that was already posted.
  7. This is not exclusively a US politics community. You're encouraged to post stories about anyone from any place in the world at any point in history as long as you meet the other rules.
  8. All Lemmy.World Terms of Service apply.

Also feel free to check out:

Icon credit C. Brück on Wikimedia Commons.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/71220185

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 19 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (3 children)

After nine months immersed in transportation policy, I’ve come to believe something simple: Republicans and Democrats are often arguing for the same thing using completely different languages.

I'm going to remove the specific parties from tbe discussion becuase this is more than a Dems vs Reps thing. But it is indeed not uncommon for people in general to actually more or less agree, but lose nuance or understanding by disagreeing on the language used.

How we frame the issue matters. The Left loses the Right as soon as bike lanes are tied into identity politics. Multimodal equity [...]

First of all, multimodal equity is a term that can only be common among transportation advocates like this person. This is jargon, not common terminology. Second, this term is not in any way about identity politics. It is about equity of modes of transport. In other words we should design cities, neighborhoods and roads with consideration for more than one mode of traffic. This has nothing at all to do with "identity politics" except for that the weird hang ups that the right has projected onto the term "equity". So yes, this may lose the right, but it is not for a good reason.

Multimodal equity is simply “freedom of movement” to a Republican.

Mkay. I don't think there is anything wrong with either term. For someone not involved in conversations around transportation much, the former is a little bit jargony and the latter is a bit vague. But if you understand what they mean, either term is perfectly fine.

But when Republicans talk about freedom, the progressives hear privilege.

No we don't. The left sees privilege that the right ignore plenty. But it has nothing to do with their use of the word "freedom" unless you are using the word wrong, such as religios freedom to impose your religion on everyone else.

Aren’t the Left and the Right essentially saying the same thing?

They can be. Are they? Are there people on the right that agree with your advocacy for multimodal equity/freedom of movement? Not according to your own comments:

I’m a Republican, and in nine months of advocating for safer streets, I have yet to meet another one.

You also mention that the Republican Secretary of Transport is more concerned about roads, bridges and ports than about bike lanes, sidewalks and crosswalks. So you tell me. Is the right saying the same things as the left on this subject? Or is it just you? And it also wasnt you until you suffered a personal tragedy that.made you reevaluate your stance. Because that is what it sounds like.

[–] naught101@lemmy.world 13 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Good analysis.

I would say that (as a non-American lefty), when I hear "freedom" in an American context, I hear "individualism", and since that's usually more focussed on "freedom to ..." rather than "freedom from ...", then it isassociated with privilege, especially when uttered by middle class people

[–] Soggy@lemmy.world 6 points 19 hours ago

"Freedom to" vs "freedom from" is one of the core pillars of the problem on a societal level, yeah.

[–] jtrek@startrek.website 3 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

And it also wasnt you until you suffered a personal tragedy that.made you reevaluate your stance. Because that is what it sounds like.

Generally, people change their mind from in group pressure, or trauma. That's really it. Facts from the out-group won't do it. Looks like a bit of trauma shook the author up here.

[–] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 2 points 19 hours ago

They didn't care until some in their in group suffered. Only once it actually entered their bubble did it start to matter. But it still only matters because it's effected their world directly. It didn't really make them care about others.

[–] Soggy@lemmy.world 1 points 19 hours ago

this term is not in any way about identity politics.

Not to reasonable people. But to these ones anything other than extra-wide lanes for their lifted dually with extended wing mirrors for the trailer they never pull is an attack on their identity as a White Christian True American Patriot.