Відео

I'm a conservative and I'm for good urban planning. I don't mind the arguments for good urban planning that the Left promote. If the argument by the Left for good urbanism advances good urbanism, then so be it. The issue I observed is that not many in the Right are for urban planning because when the Left promotes urbanism, they try to push people into going along with other issues that don't involve advancing good urbanism. Also, the Right is weary of any issue the Left campaign on. I sympathize with that. Whenever the Left does something with certain issues, it tends to be problematic. Because of that, it breeds distrust. So naturally, the Right tends to be skeptical or keep their guard up on issues that the Left promote. My solution is that use only arguments that advance good urbanism and show why it advances the topic. DON"T go off tangeant. Emphasize that the argument is more bipartisan/nonpartisan than it seems. Show that it's a compelling argument despite it being a common argument by the Left.

majority of europe is right wing, and right wing is more tolerant than farfuk leftists. Sadly farfuk leftists call center-right far right. Trump is also mostly center right, but hes just stupid, because he thinks leading a country is same as business. He had to stick to business, he has no place in leading a country, he just wants more power and more recognition, hes just same type of megalomaniac like vladolf putler. Just look how well nazis made germany. And no, everything wasnt leveled to the ground, leftist soviet tyrants rebuilt cities bad for walking, and eastern european cities were actually completely leveled to the ground, while german cities, maybe some 5-10%.

Most crime in the UK is related to cars. It's not recognised as crime unfortunately.

Very well wrtten and produced. Very strong, thurough, lucid and cogent argument presented. very well done 👏👏

This is such a good video, very good job. Don't stop. I wish I could start my channel on urbanism but I guess I'm not that brave or lacking skills.

41:37 -- Those costs may seem steep, but rail is even worse. California's HSR project is up to $200M/mi, and even half or a quarter of that is still far more expensive than highway projects.

You know little about Chirac.

I guarantee that every single city you think is a good "left leaning" city was entirely and repugnantly conservative when they were created. There are no new urban cities built my "left leaning" people because they can't do it. The only good urban planning happens in severely conservative places, which is why in the west, there are no left leaning people building good urban environments. If they were doing so, then there would be no reason to make this video. Left leaning people are struggling against their backwards beliefs and cant understand why they themselves cant achieve what they want, and they are too obtuse to realize it's their own doing. The only promising urban developments in the entire world right now are in conservative cities in asia and the middle east.

The type of places that my great grand parents and ancestors lived in? You realize most people for all or history lived outside of urban environments? My dads entire side of the family lived on farms for centuries since coming to America. Same with my mom's mom. My moms fathers family immigrated to a city, but he left. 90% of people should be living on farms, but since there is no need for 90% of people to be farming the land, the plot size decrease from rural to a suburban size is obvious. I do not need to live on a farm, but still want to not live is a shit hole urban environment. 90% of everyone's ancestors lived in non urban communities, the growth of cities is completely unnatural. Only in the past couple hundred years has it gone from 90% to 50% of people.

What all yall commenters are SEVERELY OVERLOOKING is the fact that cities have been built for cars in mind. You cant build over that. City planners are shit at their jobs and roads make no sense nowadays. If you want walkability you're going to have to tear everything up snd start from scrstch, do you realize how much money that is and how much will be our own money which is vulnerable to laundering?? Sure its fine if we individually pitched in but a project that big would have to have an overseer unless we did it the old way and build wherewver the fuck we wanted till natural cohesion sets in.

All the walkable cities people are childless or have few children. The difference between taking 4 kids in a car somewhere vs taking 4 kinds on public transit is huge. One of the reasons the US has maintained a higher birthrate than Europe is exactly the structure of American Cities they love to criticize.

Small towns are overlooked. They are conservative, pretty walkable, have downtowns, and have single families homes. Perhaps they are best of suburbs with walkability of cities. I think there is much potential and more investment in these communities would be great.

That click analyze to begin gave me flashbacks 😮

Walkable means densely populated which most of us do not like. Wanna be somewhere walkable, move downtown.

9:20 - Typical suburbanites will pay money and travel to "urban simulacra" like upscale malls, theme parks, and cruises, but the key is that those spaces are heavily regulated, manicured, and secured. Actual dense urban spaces and transit are perceived (accurately or otherwise) as being more chaotic, dirty, and crowded, rife with crime, panhandling, harassment, open drug use, and other unpleasantness.

Love the flamenco soundtrack!

USA is like a NIMBY dystopia.

I feel like it’s really really hard to talk about this and take supposed freedom loving conservatives seriously (in the face of all the contradictions you laid out) without mentioning the fact that a lot of this is a result of straight up racism

Can the right do urbanization? They don't want anything to do with walkable cities. It's the left who want to create better infrastructure. The right just want to con people by cutting social programs, raise taxes for the working class and cut taxes for the wealthy. How can anyone ever think the right cares about bettering our infrastructure??

Would walkability actually increase without our smart phones? It was after smart phones that I saw walkability decrease and traffic increase. Crime against women increased a lot as the town became more rich, liberal, trendy. It may seem odd, but what if it's the phone and tech actually causing sprawl and less walking, thus less socializing and walkability?

so inspired by your work hannah! :)

I have been constantly thinking about how we lack real value of our land. The natural space is so quickly destroyed to host agricultural land, which is supposedly valuable until it is sold for sprawled development. It is so inefficient

17:00 There is a huge mall area in the outside of my city that is a nightmare during rush hour. Plenty of space for cars? huge parking lots, but a frustration nonetheless. It is also extremely difficult to navigate the area on foot despite it being walking distance from where I live.

This video also explains why I want to live in a retirement community at age 28. I toured an apartment complex that used to be a 55+ community and there was a huge lobby for meeting up, a small library, and community spaces all within one huge building. It was fantastic. I ended up going with another apartment because I didn't know if my schedule would aling with people who wanted quiet hours early.

The number of times I've heard people talk about how old people shouldn't be driving, I get mad at those people not willing to spend all of their time driving them where they want to go...or just supporting public transportation? In India there is some form of mass transportation almost everywhere. Even im more remote places.

Something that should be brought up, you keep using "the right" and conservatives interchangeably. That is about as far from the truth as you can get in the United States. Sure, a lot of people on "the right" call themselves conservative, but there is very little conservative about what they do.

Excellent video but the parties being on the wrong sides at 2:53 pained me

I think it's important to change how these things are discussed to focus on what conservatives care about, lowering taxes, lower cost of living, safety for their children from getting ran over and reducing their commute times to work. Too much emphasis is put on what liberals care about. Of course it helps the poor and the environment - cheaper things almost always do.

Coservatism should lean towards walkability. Cars are the new thing, not a lifestyle of old

I think there are several divides on the right that lead them to having far more mixed opinions on urban development than might be known by outsiders. One of the most important ones is the urban, suburban and rural divide. Here, urban conservatives (yes we exist) are the most open and supportivw to public infrastructure reform and are generally more positive towards government intervention more generally and see urbanism from a traditionalist stand point. For suburban conservatives, they are far more split. Plenty still want better infastructure, less congested paths to work and safe sidewalks for their kids and them to walk on around their neighborhood. However, they are highly skeptical of building affordable apartments (despite some of them being on the lower side of the income spectrum themselves), public transportation and housing that is denser than your average suburban home. They also seemingly love yards and grass for some reason. Then there are rural conservatives who largely see anyone in cities as some sort of perennial enemy and any attempt to improve city planning as an attack on their lifestyle, even though it would have the least effect on them. These are the people most emotionally attached to their large trucks, highways and since they have never lived in a city, they don't understand the appeal of more dense development. They want cities designed for their need, or rather what they think their needs are. Large highways to ferry them to large parking lots to go into big stores or restaurants. Ironically these might be the conservatives who position themselves as traditionalist the most but also most actively cheer the destruction of traditional cities and small towns.

no, MAGA is explicitly a cultural movement, not an economic one. ex tariffs, inflation, obsession with DEI and trans

I voted Trump, walkable cities are fine, but you don't have to sacrifice the abilty to use cars there. I was in Karlstad, Sweden for a few months, did not rent a car at all, walked most.places as I am cheap and think the bus is too expensive. It is set up perfectly for both cars and walkers. I would often walk from the apartment 2 amd a half miles to the city center, sometimes I would walk over 10 miles in a day.

Conservatives dont want walkable cities. They want walkable towns.

And when did walkable cities becoming a something the left owned?

Yeah no thank you. You want cimmie stuff go to commie land.

It isn't a shift to the right so much as "vote the bums out". When government doesn't deliver, people tend to vote for the other guy. Never mind that we saw what the other guy did 4 years ago, and it wasn't great.

amazing video! keep going and don't give up!!!!

I’m Chris from Saskatoon Saskatchewan. I am a former left-leaning individual. The woman have a child with is a Native American woman that is the race relations consultant for the city.. i’ve sat on 360 committee for land use in the Broadway area. This is a neighbourhood high density.. the reason I say former left leaning is the left my daughter‘s name is Che as in Che Guevara so obviously I was left leaning , this is the problem with liberal people is they can’t even tell you what a woman is and they have this collectivist ideology group thing! people read a paper on Palo ferry or Norm Chomsky and they feel they’re gonna change the world by opposing something that’s horrible but the funny thing is the people I’ve met that are like this. I always see them in the Walmart but they hate capitalism for some reason. in the poor neighborhood. I love so much the grocery store closed down because of shoplifting very wealthy affluent area many professors in this area as it is close to university, beautiful old character homes but no one can afford to buy these houses. I have this house since 2008. Yes walkable areas and land use are important where I used to own. My house was very high density very trendy is being killed by progressive ideology tourist from out of town that would normally have gone to this area because it was so cool and interesting are now sick and tired of being asked for change you’re sick and tired of having the car breaking into so that’s what you get when you vote left. I’ve been on both sides of the fence at the left has lost a crew of thinking and cognitive abilities.

In Saskatoon Saskatchewan in the Broad area is the most WOKE area of this city? I live there since 2008. I had a business on the street. My daughter‘s name is Che as in Che Guevara and you know what Social Justice Warriors are ridiculous and they’re thinking and then for part of it is most of these people that want bike lanes are too over being overweight and obese to even ride a bike

Hello Chris Canada anyways, I sat on a committee that looked at land use in Saskatoon Saskatchewan in particular of the Broadway area, which is a trendy urban area close to university. This is the artsy cultural area. I had property in this area and I also had a business. Hey hi ann hair salon. This is of course 15 years ago. Long story short is the area I wanted to go with more foot traffic and more bus transportation. It killed the area in the areas you can park in where deemed for two hours only street. People drive to their dental appointment and come out with a ticket. Is it ideal for people to walk after they’ve had dental surgery no, it’s not and unfortunately idealism and virtue signalling and we should do this and we shall do that just doesn’t work.

Warms my heart to see leftists extending an olive branch to us on the right on this issue without dismissing us as reactionaries for rejecting modernist architecture.

1. Housing prices are caused by Statal regulations. The amount of barriers that a man has to break through in order to get a house is Statal related. There are huge amounts of Statal lands that should be free to do homesteading, but again, the State doesn't facilitate it. Add inflation and the neokeynesian system, and your money loses value. 2. There is a rejection to trains because they are Statal services. They mean very expensive to create and use, they generate higher taxes, debt and more inflation. Trains were a solution in the XIX century, the US expanded thanks to the railways. In the second half of the century, Rockefeller advocated for the creation of a new Statal regulation that only gave some enterpreneurs the power to administer train services. From that point on, they got a monopoly on trains and later they used that money to enter into the oil industry. Trains should be a solution, but they should be PRIVATE! Non the damn disaster it is today. 3. I laugh to the idea of "individualism" associated to conservatives. Their homes are hilariously the same as the rest of them, the architectonic aesthetic has been collectivized, there is no nuance of individual expression aside from the external lights and the ocassional Republican vs Democratic posters during campaigns. The classic homesteadings were much more beautiful, much more distinctive before the architectonic barbarism that the Frankfurt school proposed. 4. Locals determine what is and what is not a problem within their environment. It is sheer hubris of of looking a town whose population is chilling, with a city perspective to say "they have this problem that they don't see... we should interfere with a State-funded city planning". All of those are nothing more than, again, attempting to centralize what is considered best, and to later create more stuff that is infistinguishable from other places. Decentralization brings up variety, an individualist perspective looks for innovation due to their inclination on making yourself different from the rest. Centralized planning creates global disasters with no true alternatives, as the only alternative is the one that the centralizers allow you to take. The best parts of new York are not the new ones, but the older ones, the ones that were never planned. Brasilia is a hellish city that noone wants to live within, and it was the first attempt of total Statal city planning.

Well done 👍

Sure. Conservatives could do it. They can do anything they want since they have the supreme court, the presidency and the senate. (Maybe the house also, i forget.) They probably wont though. They dont care about normal people. All they want is tax cuts for the rich, the dismantling of the epa and fda and education system, and a more powerful executive office. Theyre to entagngled with big oil and other corporate powers whose business model relies on cars.

I can speak on behalf of the young right here, our goal with urbanism is also walkable cities that are more space-efficient and promoting of local community. The main two differences I hear between the right and left on this is that a lot of leftists (as far as I've seen) seem to want to ban cars and built brutalist style urban jungles, which I staunchly disagree with. The primary issue is that our public transportation is just an inferior option, not just because of lack of options, but because our major cities use their subway systems and bus system as a dumping ground for the homeless and mentally ill. Many older right-leaning people saw the era of the "future" after WWII with the suburb and office centered cities becoming the norm, and support it because that's their "me me me" individualized society, which philosophically is that opposite of the actual values of the right, being Tradition, Family, Identity, and Property. The future will improve, because these people supporting atomized car-centred society will die out or leave the forefront as the actual right re-emerges.

The elephant in the room here is the petrodollar - the system by which global oil sales are used to prop up the value of the dollar, which replaced the previous gold standard. Anything that potentially decreases fossil fuel consumption threatens this system and therefore US hegemony. Until we find a suitable replacement for this system, the incentive will be to create broken, car-dependent cities, and the right will be propagandized into favoring them.

People don't want to wait for the bus or take ages walking to their destination. With a car it's walk a few steps out of the front door, get in the car and go. No timetables, no waiting

Always wondered if right wing would destroy walkable nice area.

Liberals are right leaning too, it's just that the US politics are sooo right, that any mildly centrist view is perceived as a leninist marxist stalinist Soviet threat.

Conservatives like to conserve the current status quo, they never ever introduce any legislation to do anything about the environnement or any major real issue, all they do is give tax cuts to billionaire oligarchs