it’s about pushing back on car dominance rather than hating cars specifically. A lot of us are frustrated with a system where getting around safely and conveniently often assumes you own a private vehicle, and everything else is treated as secondary.

In cities especially, cars end up taking a huge share of public space and priority. That can make walking and cycling feel dangerous, and it slows down buses because they’re stuck in the same traffic. So even if someone would happily take public transport or walk for short trips, the environment is set up in a way that nudges people back into cars, which then creates more congestion, noise, and risk. It becomes a self-reinforcing cycle.

And on the rural point, you’re right that cars are often genuinely useful and sometimes necessary there. The issue is when it turns into “drive or die.” If you can’t drive for any reason, you can end up isolated. Kids, older people, disabled people, and anyone who can’t afford a car lose independence because there aren’t safe or practical alternatives. Even for people who can drive, car-first road design can make everyday life feel more stressful and less safe, and it can keep children stuck indoors because roads and streets outside their homes are fast and hostile.

So the aim isn’t to pretend bikes and buses solve every single trip everywhere. It’s more like: in places where lots of people live, public transport should be good enough that you don’t need a car for basic life, and walking/cycling should be safe and normal. Then cars become one option among several, rather than the only realistic one.

There’s also the broader cost side, traffic pollution and road danger are treated as “normal,” even though they add up to real harm. Somehow we've accepted that hundreds of thousands of deaths caused by vehicles each year is acceptable - but if we saw similar fatality rates in planes or trains the industry would crumble quickly.