(Driven to Destruction is a series outlining how America became so dependent on the personal automobile, and how we must break this dependency if we want to create a sustainable way of life for future generations.)
When I was a child, I became fascinated by the Interstate Highway System. On family trips, I would sit in the backseat with my Rand McNally road atlas, carefully charting the passage of each town, exit, and rest stop. At home, I would spend hours pouring over the maps of all 50 states, memorizing the numbering system and dreaming of one day travelling on each and every Interstate across the country.
Admittedly, most people never achieve this level of obsession. But as a nation, we have become quite attached to our system of high-speed, stop-free highways. In fact, for my generation and younger, we’ve never known life without the ubiquity of Interstate travel.
As a result of the Interstate’s omnipresence, and also because they have had many positive benefits for the country, the majority of us have never even stopped to consider if we should be looking for alternatives. A 1996 publication by the American Highway Users Alliance calls the system "The Best Investment A Nation Ever Made", highlighting economic growth and increased mobility for more Americans as two of the key benefits – claims which are certainly true.
But 14 years after that publication, we are growing more aware of the many downsides that now cancel out these benefits. For example, the construction of urban Interstates has devastated many inner city communities:
The interstates quickly became fuel for generating vast areas of car-dependent suburbs that created a “donut” form of development, turning some inner cities into semi-abandoned areas. Martin Luther King, Jr. was one of many who decried the inherent racism of these road schemes. In his speech "Remaining Awake Through a Great Revolution," delivered on March 31, 1968 , King said "These forty million [poor] people are invisible because America is so affluent, so rich; because our expressways carry us away from the ghetto, we don’t see the poor."
In many cases, efforts by Civil Rights leaders to stop Interstates from slicing through urban centers were successful, giving us hope that passionate and dilligent organizing can overcome the power of the car culture. And there are quite a few current issues on which the car culture is a chief obstacle, most notably climate change and peak oil:
Transportation planning in the United States — the epicenter of oil combustion — has been remarkably impervious to rising gasoline prices and growing awareness of climate change and the geological reality of finite fossil fuel supplies. Hundreds of billions of dollars have been committed for massive expansions of the interstate highway system. The plans for these “NAFTA superhighways” and Outer Beltways assume limitless cheap oil, a trillion dollar mistake that must be corrected if there is a hope for a renewable energy society after petroleum.
Despite the obvious warning signs, Americans are undeterred in their petroleum-based love affair. Calls for more and bigger highways and expanded offshore drilling drown out the voices suggesting that we look for new and more sustainable ways to travel. We are addicted to our Interstates. And like so many addictive substances, our Interstates are slowly killing us. Philip Goff sums up the situation well:
Many of humanity’s most pressing problems can be traced to the overuse of automobiles and unchecked suburban development. Cars are here to stay and they certainly have their uses, but, too many people have deemed these uses to mean every single trip, whether one mile or one hundred miles.
The daily bombardment of automobile images and our government’s obstinate attitude towards alternatives has allowed us to accept the auto-dominated landscape that surrounds us all. Until this type of behavior is curbed, our decadent lifestyle will continue to decimate communities and cities, and precipitate the ongoing destruction of the natural world.
Clearly, then, it is time for the end of the Interstate Age. It is simply a destructive and unsustainable model for our long-term future. Not that we have to completely abandon our highways – we can still use them recreationally. I for, one, would love see a 500-mile NASCAR race go straight down 1-85 from Richmond to Atlanta. But the practice of using Interstates and personal cars for the bulk of our travelling must start winding down.
In coming installments of Driven to Destruction, we will examine exactly how we can transform the car culture. Topics will include fostering the bicycle culture, raising children who aren’t in love with the automobile, and designing cities and neighborhoods in ways that discourage driving instead of requiring it. For next time, however, there’s one more element of our current car culture to deconstruct: Individualism.





60 Comments







Interesting post.
I thought your post was going to be about how we do not renew our infrastructure ie the highways are being driven (literally) to destruction (eg. bridges in Minnesota.) But perhaps you argue that that would be a good thing…personally our household would really love to see high speed rail like they have in Europe esp given how awful air travel is nowadays.
Remember that the Republicans disowned Ike because He built that system.
They never liked it, believed in it, or wanted it, but like with the healthcare bill they all took credit for it, used it, and couldn’t live without it.
They also never believed in maintaining anything except our Military, which they will spend trillions on while the Countries infrastructurs crumbles.
The true meaning of Conservative is Cheap Bastard, they don’t want to pay taxes or for anything they use.
The Tea Partiers prove the point when the say smaller government, stay out of my life, but don’t touch My SS or Medicare.
With all the jobs and wealth created by Interstates, you would think that Republicans would have been all for it. But then again, that would have required foresight…
Your right Jim.
We forget what the Intersate System is to this Country, because it’s there and many of us use it very little.
I’m old enough to remember before it, and setting for hours on two lane roads just to get from one town top the other.
Our costs for food and everything we consume would be way higher without it, but the Republicans are just to damn dumb to relize that.
I have been slow to catch onto the hidden motive in USG policy, like the destruction of the inner city caused by the interstate highway system. Shame on me.
Some of that is true, however White Flight from the Inner was helped by investors building suburbs far away from the Inner city, the Government just gave them the infrastructure to do it.
So again – Who benefits?
When wealthy investors and real estate developers spread lies, rumor and promote general divisiveness.
Who benefits?
As I keep saying and others in the Black community have been saying since “40 and a mule”
FOLLOW THE MONEY
Remember, Ike envisioned the interstate system as an essential part of national defense, enabling the transport of tanks from one part of the nation to the other as needs be. But, it became much more. In my opinion, the manner in which it enabled mobility has served an important function in binding together the country. Does that mean that better public transportation is not of paramount importance? Certainly not. Promoting a bicycle culture? Wishful thinking.
The only time I’ve ever seen the interstate hwy sys used for ‘defense’ is the mobilization for the first Gulf war, when there were plenty of troops moving on the NYS thruway.
As for binding the nation together, it was more likely designed to ease the white escape from black neighborhoods.
Need to know your history. With the destruction of the Pacific fleet, the military were in a panic as to defending the West Coast. There was fear of an imminent Japanese invasion, and no way of moving the forces needed, given the highway system as it was. Ergo, Ike devised the interstate system as a cure for that. Tanks move to the battle front on semis.
It doesn’t really matter how the Interstates came into being. These days, they’re driving us toward destruction, and we need a change in habits. They had a great run, but it’s time to move on!
East coast for me, obviously. As for the West Coast invasion by Japs, I think after Pearl Harbor that must have been pretty low probability.
Again, you need to know your history. Why do you think Japanese citizens were interred? Because of the almost panic of the vulnerability to invasion.
It is my read of history that Japanese-Americans were interred so that white Americans could steal their property.
Initially it was fear.
some German-Americans (southern Minnesota) were interred briefly during WWI also.
Yupper. Ike took a page from Napoleon’s book. The whole reason Paris has all those lovely broad boulevards is because Napoleon got sick and tired of having to put down the periodic Parisian riots in a place where the rioters, thanks to the narrow medieval streets and densely-built neighborhoods, had the advantage over those who would suppress them. When he finally got the power to do so, he demolished whole districts and rebuilt them with avenues broad enough to allow masses of troops to easily march along them.
Complete nonsense with regard to Ike.
Hate to bust all these “history” bubbles but the Interstate system was modeled after the German Autobahn system. Ike was a participant in the 1919 Army convoy crossing of America on the “Lincoln Highway”. His experience there and in the assault on Germany led to the “National Interstate and Defense Highways Act of 1956″.
Keep in mind that what works for the Boston/Washington/Atlanta corridor may not be an effective solution for “fly-over” country.
As to your second point, “white flight” occurred much later.
White flight occurred later than the 1950s & 1960s when the interstate highway sys was developed? Could have fooled me.
I disagree Jim. I believe your objection is based on the oil that is consumed in the form of gasoline.
Electric cars combined with solar and wind generation will alleviate this issue.
Second point is mass transit does not provide for those that live outside of major urban centers. What would you do for them?
I didn’t see the data here, what portion of fuel is used for commuting vs traveling from state to state for purposes other than commuting to work?
If there were public transport systems, people would settle on those lines and the issue you propound would not exist. For example, according to my memory, commented in last post on this theme, developers in early 20th C would buy up vast tracts of land on edge of city, bribe city officials for street car tracks permits (natural monopolies), build them, sell their adjoining land for housing at astronomical profits over & above cost of ‘public’ transport infrastructure development.
I appreciate your thoughts and the direction you take. There will still be need for personal transportation of some sort.
We had personal transportation 200 years ago, We will still require some form of personal transportation 100 years from now.
It’s not an either/or; it’s a Q of relative proportions. More public transport, more development takes place along those lines, less proportionate need for personal vehicles.
Yes, exactly.
Well put.
What about the sizable number of people living in rural areas? I’ve noticed that many of those advocating high-density urban development and near-total reliance on public transit (or bicycles) also decry the near-extinction of the family farm. Until the day that light rail stops at the gate of my pecan orchard, there will be a need for an extensive and well-maintained highway system. I doubt that the produce urban dwellers buy at farmers’ markets were brought in by bus.
Oh, we’re gonna have a highway system. And for that matter, I don’t see replacing the automobile in most rural communities.
But is rural automobile use the primary problem? Nope.
Do our highways need to go smack thru the middle of cities? Nope.
I think the best solution for transportation is going to be a hybrid solution. Light rail for the cities. Increased rail for long haul freight. And high speed rail for city to city transport. And the good old automobile for rural and low pop suburban area’s. City folk can always rent a car if traveling off the lines.
What would country folk get out of this? Well, for one, lower gas prices. City folk won’t be wasting all the gas. And of course, less polution will be billowing out of the cities and into the countryside.
Well said! We don’t have to eliminate the automobile – just diversify and not put all our eggs in one basket.
Jim
If transportation issues interest you, this link is pretty decent. He covers a lot of the possibilities fairly well.
http://www.infrastructurist.com/
Historically, looking at what is sometimes known as “The General Motors Streetcar Conspiracy” can provide food for thought.
Indeed. In fact, one of the things that opponents of mass transit often do is link this to things like gun control, and create scenarios of gun-grabbing decadent citydwellers seeking to emasculate the hearty pickup-driving and deer-hunting rural and exurban folks by taking away their guns and herding them into cities.
Remember the alternate NRA motto: “An armed man is a citizen, an unarmed man is a subject.” This is why talking about how nice light and heavy passenger rail is in Europe cuts no ice with these people — in their view (encouraged by FOX News and other similar propaganda outlets) Europeans aren’t allowed to have guns and live unfree lives under the heavy hands of their Socialist taskmasters.
Hey PW – Thanks I had forgotten about that NRA motto.
Mass transmit (railroad being a component) needs feeder lines. The feeders can be lighter rail, trolleys etc.
But when we get down to it, there is still a need for some form of personal transportation. Bicycles, electric cars, trikes, many different forms along with cartage transport needs. (and personally, I’d prefer not to return to ox carts on the red river trail)
Many European countries, esp Switzerland, have higher gun ownership than U.S. and better public transport. (Disclosure: Switzerland military is universal & arms are kept in homes, as far as I remember. However, I think there are other European examples where the two can be unlinked. Intellectual exercise in U.S. on this, as well as many other subjects, is severely constipated.)
(p.s. I’m NRA Life Member, but keep it a secret?)
Are you a hunter? Some of my best friends are. I have no problem with gun ownership. After all, I’m a white upper middle class female, a class rarely victim of gun problems (my late husband’s 1987 self-inflicted gunshot suicide notwithstanding). If I lived in a black ghetto, I might have a different opinion.
Yep, sure am. Long family tradition of it, many generations. I have five children, we all camp together during the season.
Until this year, we have had to purchase very little as we harvested everything we needed. But the harvest, it wasn’t so good this year but the time spent sitting for hours talking with the kids, for two weeks, well that can’t be beat.
(sorry that you had to experience your husband’s choice)
Much can be learned from Switzerland’s’ penal system also.
I literally thought I had passed into some dimensional warp the first time I was in Switzerland and was told how they treat those convicted of a crime.
Speaking of Switzerland, they have an interesting little town called Zermatt. Combustion engines are not allowed. Access is via rail. And local transport amounts to fancied up electric golf carts.
The town depends on tourism and vacationers, so they wanted to eliminate smog.
It’s a nice place to visit. Probably not a model for an entire nation but it may be a solution in some regions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zermatt
Well I used to drive trucks and I can tell you that previous presidents have mis-funded Interstate projects but you also have to remember when the Interstate project was started we had just come off of WWII and was flushed with plenty of eager workers, engineers and money/investors.
The roads overall are TERRIBLE.
Having driven on the German Autobahn, well…. No comparison.
Although my own fascination with the system never reached your level, Jim, a very interesting and entertaining read.
It’s not so much interstates, it’s oil. Remember, railroads also take up large chunks of land, though considerably less than they did at their peak nearly a hundred years ago. When autos become all electric, greenhouse gas emissions go down — and that’s true even when the electricity comes from coal, simply because it’s more efficient for a few dozen large power plants to burn coal than it is for a hundred million cars to burn gasoline.
That being said, it’s better to not use coal to get electricity, and we really need to use the interstates for something more than facilitating car usage. A possible solution would be to make them into solar energy collectors, which would save us from having to put solar panels on land that we’d rather see kept as wilderness or farmland.
How about just decreasing our demand for transportation in general – no matter where the energy comes from?
It’s the whole freedom thing — the desire to “light out for the territories” existed well before the interstates did. The whole “manifest destiny” trip, for good or ill (mostly ill, especially if you were a Native American or an African taken by force to become someone else’s chattel in a strange land) is a big part of America’s cultural DNA.
Many Americans see themselves as being freer than Europeans because their ancestors left places where they had to conform to the general will and stay within severely limiting social castes instead of living freely. They’ve been trained by decades if not centuries of propaganda to see Europeans as poor downtrodden people who don’t have the right to bear arms or eat meat or live their lives as they please.
The irony, of course, is that if anything, class mobility in the US is worse now than at any time in the past century, and the gulf between the rich and everyone else is wider than it’s been since the 1920s. But that makes the totems of individuality and power they see as being under heavy attack — the gun, the car, the right to live in a suburb, the right to smoke cigarettes and eat meat — things to cling to even harder.
Damn, Phoenix, you’re practically writing my next installment. :)
Hey, I’ve got relatives who bought into this lock, stock and barrel. To them, advocacy of mass transit means forcing them to live in the city, away from guns, hunting, freedom, and fresh air, while making them (the biggie) live next to black people. Except that they don’t call them “black people”.
I’ve got similar relatives. I’ve learned not to talk about politics at Thanksgiving.
Per freight ton shipped vs. trucks? You must be kidding.
Tell that to the people in a bedroom community near where I live. They’re a bunch of white-flight latecomers who successfully agitated to shut down the dinner train that was based in a nearby town rather than risk the line being used for (gasp!) mass transit. Nevermind that the railroad was there before they were.
The larger point is that rugged individualism (or the manipulation of the perception of same) wasn’t invented by Henry Ford or Alfred Sloan. It’s been a part of the American psyche since the beginning. The question is: How can we work to change this, so people don’t, for example, see advocacy of light rail as a way of forcing people to live only in certain areas?
Um no. Rugged individualism is just another slogan of the PTB to manipulate the boobs into doing what the PTB want them to do.
It’s a slogan, but it’s quite old. Google “rugged individualism” sometime and see how far back the phrase goes; it predates the interstates.
Of course it does. Nothing used to manipulate U.S. boobs is new.
I think that we work within it, not against it. Like you’ve stated very well, personal transportation is equated to personal freedom in the same way that the horse was part of that freedom 100 years ago. Emphasizing that mass transit is not designed to replace personal transportation, just a more cost effective option.
If a light rail design is logical in both cost and design, people will support it.
And then there’s the thought, we may need to have less dense population centers if people start to rely more on produce they grow themselves.
That’s already happening in places like Youngstown, Cleveland, and Pittsburgh. Abandoned neighborhoods are being turned into parks and community gardens.
Dr. Kirk Murphy is upstairs!
Bouncing the rubble: Biden and Rubin star at Hamilton Project relaunch
I have a lot of elderly clients who remember their fathers working the ground with horses or mules, and who themselves rode a horse to school. So, I wonder, when the energy needed to produce the feed for the horses, over against the volume of food/feed produced, factoring in the manure produced and recycled as fertilizer, did they use more energy, or less energy per unit of food produced?
The Interstate system was also connected the Cold war deployment of nuclear weapons, particularly missiles in hardened silos. The trains did not go to the Minuteman sites but the interstates did.
That said, I am planning on taking a cross country tour this June in my automobile…haven’t done that for a long time, I have heard the countryside has been dehabilited by WalMarts and Monsanto. And I know the Mississippi is polluted, but I have always wanted to camp out along it and try to conjure up the spirit of Mark Twain.
Thanks Jim ,good stuff ,I can’t wait for the next installment !
I’ve always wondered why we didn’t plan for train tracks down the center median of the highway system.
Among other reasons, medians, shoulders, grades, and curve radius’ etc are all considered as part of the safety designed into the highway system. If a vehicle were to leave the interstate at normal speeds, a train (or track system) would not be a good thing to have waiting. Much of the last couple of decades of highway construction has actually consisted of going back and enhancing (widening, sloping, removing obstacles etc) these areas as opposed to basic highway construction.
Isn’t the culture of NASCAR (” … 500-mile NASCAR race … down 1-85 from Richmond to Atlanta … “)a perfect example of having lost our way as a culture? Seems to me that such heedless, extravagant operation in the physical, social, and cultural environment is what it killing us, both environmentally AND spiritually: How can one embrace such and achieve a wholistic peace with self, community, and the universe so that we all can survive? Can someone help me see what I’ve missed in this picture? Isn’t such exactly what needs to change in our society?
So, basically, your idea of a shiny happy society is to discriminate against cars and the millions of people who actually love and enjoy them (I know, it’s a foreign concept to all of you), and expect them to be told to enjoy riding bikes in 90 degree weather and use public transportation that may not be for everyone, or won’t be convenient in emergencies? And to indoctrinate our children against making decisions for themselves when it comes to transportation needs, even though there will be people who invariably refuse to go along with what’s politically correct?
And you expect everyone to go along with this? Good luck, you’re going to need it.