I’ll spare you my Ted Baxter ‘It all started in a little 5,000-watt radio station in Fresno’ origin story about how I came to be writing fiction over the past six years except to say, mid-way through 2016, I was wholly dissatisfied with the state of the city and this blog I’d been operating since 2010. Toronto had been seized by status quo maintenance, a return to normal, normal being relentless lip service paid to growing problems of unaffordability, inequality, crumbling infrastructure, malignant, mis-policing, etc., etc., ad nauseum. Never mind all that, we were told. What about our low property tax rates and all those cranes in the sky!
And my little contribution to the ongoing discourse? An empty howling into the void of this misguided political smugness. Continue reading →
I spent the better part of 5 hours this holiday weekend behind the wheel of a Dodge Journey, apparently the auto aficionado’s choice of SUV or… minivan or whatever thing this thing is called. How would I know the vehicle’s desirability? As soon as I returned it to the rental counter, it was summoned away to be washed and sent back out immediately upon request from another customer.
I did not sign up for a Dodge Journey, nor any other SUV or minivan. With just the 3 of us heading out of town for a couple days, figured a 4-door intermediate sized car would do the trick. But when I arrived at the rental place, there wasn’t a car on the lot. Just everything on steroids. My request for the smallest one they had delivered up the Journey. Yeah, the Journey. I wasn’t even sure I’d be able to park it in our tiny garage. (Spoiler alert: Mission Accomplished, with room to spare.)
Once out on the highway, the Dodge Journey drove like in a car commercial. If you closed your eyes and pretended all those other cars weren’t there. Only, not for too long. That’s kind of dangerous driving.
Seats as comfortable as any in my living room. Sound system better than mine at home. A/C keeping us cool on demand. Plenty of room for all the stuff we’ve packed in to make a summer long weekend complete.
Eventually, when traffic did thin out, after a couple hours, the Dodge Journey hit 140, 145 without me even really noticing. This, as the ad man’s copy reads, was a smooth ride. Enjoyable even, to a man who, at the best of times, hates being in a car.
It all got me to thinking about the not-too-distant future when we’d be handing over the task of driving fully to computers. Autonomous vehicles. Self-driving cars and the like.
The visuals we’re presented, Jetson’s style, are tiny pods, moving us around efficiently, not careening here and there, zipping back and forth, but almost assembly line like. Everyone travelling in orderly fashion at the same speed, a speed conducive, one would assume, to street life. So, not at crazy breakneck speeds.
Even out on the highways where the private automobile and trucking of goods rule, at what speed will our self-driving cars be allowed to haul it? Around these parts with a posted speed limit of 100 km/h but in practice, more like 120 before anyone really starts to notice, how fast will be deemed too fast? Eliminating driver error through computer control would, presumably, notch it up somewhat. What number will be practical, feasible or desirable?
A bigger question might be: will drivers who are used to determining their driving speed for themselves, within the constraints of using our streets with fellow travellers, of course, be willing to hand over the controls to the machine? Are we really going to be content to stick with the posted limits along with everyone else? Isn’t the appeal (at least theoretically) of driving yourself the individualism to it? We’ve known almost since the private vehicle made its first appearance that speed kills yet we’ve proven ourselves unwilling to regulate their speed in any short of resolute way outside of road sign limits. Why are we still allowing cars on our streets and roads that are capable of going well over 300km/h, and building the infrastructure to accommodate such speeds?
Are we really to believe that with the advent of autonomous vehicles, we’re simply going to take our collective foot off the gas? Not to mention, give up the luxury something like the Dodge Journey offers up now for the confined space of the prototypical self-driving car that we’re seeing on the news reels. I have my doubts. Being in traffic is being in traffic whether you’re driving or not. It’s hard to imagine giving up all the mod cons that we’ve become accustomed to if we’re still spending an inordinate amount of time in our cars in return for someonething else assuming control of the wheel.
Our relationship with our cars has never been that kind of rational. You could argue that car dependence and the building of our environment for the primacy of private automobile use is the very definition of irrational. Yet the assumption now seems to be technology will bring a sense of order, logic and reason to our road use. The machines will save us!
Only if they rewire our thinking about how we move around our cities and places, changing our priorities, will they. Because if the easiest, most reliable and comfortable way to get to where you want to go is still from inside a car, nothing much is going to change. Fewer collisions and fatalities, which is not to be sniffed at, but cars first, cars foremost.
Unless, of course there are none remaining in the lot. Then we’ll all be moving around in Dodge Journeys. Riding in extreme comfort but still stuck in traffic despite the machine’s best efforts.
I’m not left speechless very often. I lose lots of things, words are seldom on that list. But then Orlando, and the Pulse nightclub mass shooting/murder.
Our urge to explain the unexplainable seems to be a defining trait of our species. Understandable, since it is much easier to do than actually trying to prevent the unexplainable. Hindsight being 20/20.
Apportioning blame is as simple as pointing your finger and raising your voice. As is the case in many of these kinds of situations, it’s just a matter of a hate pile-on. If only we had banned/killed/jailed X, then Y would never have happened, and we’d all be as happy and content as Z.
The one unspoken current running through all of that, of course, is an absolving ourselves of responsibility, the ‘othering’. It was Them not Us. We’re all good here.
This last thought struck me as I was watching on my TV, from my safe distance on my couch in Toronto, a panel discussion on The National about the Orlando tragedy. The CBC had gathered 3 voices from the national security and international politics arena. Not surprisingly, I heard ISIS mentioned significantly more often than either homophobia or gun control. This, after all, was what these 3 experts knew best.
On first glance, it makes sense. The shooter was a Muslim-American. The FBI had, apparently, investigated him for suspected Islamic extremism ties. He had, again apparently, phoned in to 911 before the assault, pledging allegiance to ISIS.
There’s your answer, easy answer, on a platter.
This isn’t about homophobia in a country where there’s plenty of it. This isn’t about gun control in a country where there’s virtually none of it. It can only be about one thing, and one thing only. Reality is complicated. Our perception of it doesn’t have to be.
But I wonder…
If I’m a damaged man, and it’s always about men when it comes to these mass killings, a damaged Muslim man looking to go out in a hail of gunfire, what do I want as my epitaph? I Pledge My Allegiance to ISIS or I Hate Faggots. There’s a certain ring of righteousness and nobility to fighting for a cause rather than murdering out of pure hatred.
I’ve got my opinions, of course. Some informed, others far more viscerally-based. The investigation is still in its early stages. What we think we know now will need to be later updated.
But the one truth I think cannot denied here?
When we vilify others, or enable the vilification of others through the words we say, the ideas we spread, the laws we pass or don’t pass, based on gender, race, sexual orientation, political views, we create and target vulnerable individuals and communities. Hide behind degrees of hatred as you might – In this country we don’t throw them off roofs! – it’s a self-congratulatory pat on the back that passes for plausible deniability. See? No blood is on these hands.
It’s them. It’s always them. If everyone else would just act, be, believe, think, pray like we do, we wouldn’t have these kinds of problems. What we need is capitulation to the norm, not more cooperation or accommodation.
Diversity has its place, as long as it doesn’t challenge established practices. People get agitated when their way of seeing the world comes under attack. Lashing out is to be expected. Shocked by the news we’re hearing? We shouldn’t even be surprised.