告别汽车依赖:打造更宜居的城市与未来 TVO Today 2026-03-04

并非人人开车:被忽视的“非司机”群体

主持人: Sarah GoodyearDoug Gordon,很高兴见到你们。感谢你们参加我们的节目。

Original English

Host: Sarah Goodyear, Doug Gordon, good to meet you. Thank you for joining us on the rundown.

Doug Gordon: 非常感谢。

Original English

Doug Gordon: Thank you so much.

主持人: 我想先做一个小小的坦白。我……我不开车。

Original English

Host: I'm gonna start with a little bit of a confession. I I don't drive.

Sarah Goodyear: 他(指 Doug)也是。

Original English

Sarah Goodyear: He's over.

主持人: 我知道,我知道。是的。不,我很抱歉。你可以……呃,我小时候没拿驾照。我在多伦多市中心长大,从来不需要它。我父母也不开车。我以前总觉得这事儿挺尴尬的,真的,一直有点不好意思。但后来我在你们的书里读到了一个数据,让我觉得自己并不孤单。书里好像说,三分之一的美国人并不开车。那是真的吗,先生?

Original English

Host: I know. I know. Yeah. No, I'm sorry. You can No. Uh I I never got my license as a kid. I I grew up in downtown Toronto. Never needed it. Parents didn't drive. I felt a little embarrassed about it. I actually always have felt a little embarrassed about it. But then I read in your book a stat that made me feel less alone. I think it said one in three Americans don't drive. Is that true, sir?

Doug Gordon: 那是真的。呃,有一本很棒的书叫《当开车不再是选项》(When Driving Is Not an Option),作者是残障权利活动家 Anna Zivarts,是她把这个数据带到了我们面前。在美国这个显然是世界上最以汽车为中心的国家之一,30% 的人没有驾照。他们有的太年轻;有的因为残障无法开车;有的不想开车;也许有的没有合法身份。

当然,还有所有因为年龄增长而不再开车的老年人。所以,是的,有很多人就是不能开车。而我们对这些人做了什么?我们基本上是告诉他们,去接受一种社会参与度较低、机会较少、权利较匮乏的生活吧。而且,这里面确实有一种“耻辱感”,对吧?因为人们会觉得,如果你不会开车,你就不是一个真正的成年人。我很抱歉你曾有那样的感觉(笑)。

Original English

Doug Gordon: That is true. Um there's a wonderful book called when driving is not an option by a disability rights activist called Anna Zarts and she brought that statistic to the forefront for us. 30% of people in the United States of America obviously one of the most carentric countries in the world don't have a driver's license. They're too young. They're have a disability that prevents them from driving. They don't want to drive. Maybe they're undocumented. So, and then of course there are all the people who age out of driving. So, yeah, there's a lot of people who just can't drive. And what do we do with those people? We just basically tell them to accept a life in which they are less a part of society, maybe not able to access certain opportunities and less infranchised. And yeah, and there's a kind of shame about it too, right? Because it's like, oh, you're not a real grown-up if you don't know how to drive. I'm sorry that you had to feel [laughter] that.

被扭曲的城市:百年“汽车中心主义”

主持人: 只是我的家人总拿这事儿打趣我,没什么大不了的。但是 Doug,考虑到美国是如此以汽车为中心,这似乎有点反直觉,对吧?我是说,想想那种文化,想想三巨头汽车制造商,想想《速度与激情》系列,想想底特律。这种观念在美加两国如此根深蒂固,好像你一到 16 岁就理所当然该拿驾照。这到底是怎么回事?

Original English

Host: It's just my family that gives me a hard time. It's not a big deal. But Doug, it's sort of it seems almost counterintuitive considering America is so car centric, right? I mean, you think of the culture, you think of the big three automakers, you think of uh the Fast and the Furious franchise, you think of Detroit, you know, it's it's it's just so ingrained in American and and and I should say Canada, too, uh that you you just get your driver's license at 16. What's the big deal? But like it doesn't it's not that way, is it? Like,

Doug Gordon: 不。噢,我是说,首先,确实有大量的人不开车或不能开车。而且,大多数北美城市最初并不是围绕汽车设计或规划的。它们是围绕有轨电车、步行,甚至在某些情况下是围绕自行车规划的。只是后来,在很多城市,高速公路直接横穿市中心,把这些都推平了。所以,我们在书里讨论的很多内容是,这其实是一个相当近期的现象。虽然现在活着的人几乎没有人经历过汽车出现前的生活,但那真的没过去多久。我们讨论的是 70 到 100 年的以汽车为中心的设计,它扭曲了我们对城市定义以及人们应该如何生活的感知。

Original English

Doug Gordon: no. Oh, I mean, first of all, there is that huge number of people who just don't or can't drive. And most North American cities were not designed or planned around driving. They were designed and planned around street cars and walking and even cycling in some cases. And they were later bulldozed or highways in many cases right through the middle of them. So, a lot of what we're talking about in the book is that this is a rather recent phenomenon. As much as there is no person alive today who doesn't know a life before cars, um it really wasn't that long ago. We're talking about 70 to 100 years of car centric design that has warped our perceptions of what cities are and how people should live.

隐形成本:汽车依赖的生存危机

主持人: 你们在书里写道:“我们不是在开车,而是汽车在驾驭我们,我们正走向一场生存崩盘。” Sarah,我们在哪些方面正走向生存崩盘?

Original English

Host: Well, you write in the book that we are not driving cars. Cars are driving us and we're headed for an existential crash. Sarah, what ways are we heading for an existential crash?

Sarah Goodyear: 汽车依赖的负面影响太多了,你甚至可以为此写一本书——而你们确实写了(笑)。我们在书里详细列出了一些人们可能没意识到的成本。在美国,每年有 4 万人死于道路交通事故。仅此一项就是巨大的代价。这还没算上成千上万受伤的人,其中许多是足以改变人生的重伤。

接着是污染。空气污染也导致了大量的死亡和疾病。然后是气候环境成本。显然,如果把 SUV 看作一个国家,它们将位列全球碳排放量最高的前 10 个国家之列。

Original English

Sarah Goodyear: Well, the negative effects of car dependence are so long you could write a book about them and you did [laughter] and I've written Yeah, we wrote a lot of the book sort of details some of the costs that people might not realize. In the United States of America, 40,000 people lose their lives on the roads every year. That alone is a huge cost. That doesn't take into account the hundreds of thousands of people who sustain injuries and many of those are lifealtering injuries. But then there's the pollution. The air pollution also causes a lot of death and illness. And then there's the environmental cost to our climate. Obviously, if SUVs were a nation, they would be among the top 10 most uh carbon emitting nations in the world. Um,

主持人: 真的吗?前 10 名?

Original English

Host: right, eh? Top 10.

Sarah Goodyear: 是的。

Original English

Sarah Goodyear: Yeah.

主持人: SUV。

Original English

Host: SUV.

Sarah Goodyear: 是的,SUV。没错。而且,还有对动物的影响,我们正在杀害它们。它们的栖息地被道路分割,导致无法正常繁育。此外还有社会成本,这是我一直思考的一个问题:当我们进入一个强制要求每个人随时待在自己的独立金属盒子里才能办成任何事的系统时,我们失去了什么?我们不再与邻居交流,不再与城市里的同胞互动。

所有的这些成本都在不断累积,而我们大多数时候却视而不见。我们不理解这些负面影响正在发生,因为汽车已经变成了一种你必须使用的工具,对吧,去办事、上班、上学。所以,我们在书里想做的,就是帮助人们看清汽车榨取的这些可怕成本。我甚至还没谈到人们的经济成本。

Original English

Sarah Goodyear: SUVs. Yep. Yep. And um and then there's the effect on, you know, animals that were killing them. They can't reproduce properly because they don't have their habitats that are cut up by roads. Uh there is also the cost to society and I think this is one of the ones that I really think about all the time. What we're what we're losing when we put ourselves into a system that requires us each to be in our own individual metal box all the time to do anything. We're not interacting with our neighbors with our fellow citizens and in the city. Um, and so, you know, there all of these costs, they're piling up and we're blind to them a lot of the time. We don't understand all of these negative effects that are happening because the car is just a thing that you have to use, right, to do your business, to go to work, to go to school. And so, you know, I I what we're trying to do with the book is to help people see that there are these terrible, terrible costs that cars extract. I I haven't even talked about the financial cost for people

“入场费”:作为社会准入门槛的汽车

Doug Gordon: 我正想插话。在美国,一辆新车的价格超过 5 万美元。保险费也大幅上涨。这很荒谬,如果你想在北美大多数地方生活,入场费就是一个装有橡胶轮子和玻璃的巨大金属盒子

我们生而为人,作为人类动物,大多数人拥有行走的能力,或者靠自身动力移动的能力。但荒谬的是,如果你把我们从纽约带走,扔进多伦多郊区或佐治亚州的亚特兰大,完全融入社会的代价就是车险和驾照。天哪,万一你出了车祸,你还得处理健康影响,或者因为车在维修店而产生的不便。如果你真的退后一步看,我们以这种方式构建社会简直是疯了。

Original English

Doug Gordon: about to jump in and say, in the US, a new car is over $50,000. Insurance has gone way up. You know, it's absurd that if you want to live in most places in North America, the cost of entry is a giant metal box with rubber wheels and glass all around you. We are born as human animals with the ability, most of us, to walk um or to roll around on our own power. And it is really absurd that if you took us out of New York and plopped us in, you know, a suburb of Toronto or Atlanta, Georgia, the price of admission for full infranchisement in society is car insurance, a license. You know, god forbid you get in a crash and have to deal with the hap the health impacts of that or the inconvenience then of not having your car because it's in the shop. And if you really step back, it it's absurd that we built our society this way.

播客缘起:夺回“汽车战争”的话语权

主持人: 我想问问你们播客的名字——《汽车战争》(The War on Cars)。这带点戏谑的意味,但我好奇它到底是怎么来的?我知道很多年前我们有一位市长叫 Rob Ford,他曾发起一场反对“汽车战争”的运动并获胜了。但我假设你们并不是在帮他说话……

Original English

Host: I want ask you about the title of your your podcast, the war on cars. It's a little tongue and cheek, I guess, but or but where did it come from actually? I I know we had a mayor, Rob Ford, many years ago. He ran a campaign against the war on the car, and he won, but I'm assuming we can't take credit for the

Doug Gordon: 噢,或者我们可以?真的吗?(笑)

Original English

Doug Gordon: Oh, or can we? Oh, really? Okay.

Sarah Goodyear: 绝对可以。那些年我们一直在密切关注 Rob Ford。当我们决定在 2018 年开始做播客时,我们一直在想叫什么名字,想了一堆非常无聊、糟糕的名字,比如“街道播客”之类的(笑)。然后有一天我突然冲口而出:“你们知道这个播客是什么吗?这就是**‘汽车战争’播客**!”我们都笑了,然后说,等等,就是它了!

所以,是的,我们基本上是想从像已故的 Rob Ford 那样的人手中夺回这个词。既然你们想管我们叫“汽车战争”,那好吧,我们就当这个“汽车战争”。所以,这确实带有戏谑性质。很多人跟我说这个名字太有对抗性了。但事实是,为了在媒体中突围并引起人们的注意,有时你必须尝试稍微撼动一下现状。

Original English

Sarah Goodyear: Absolutely. We were following Rob Ford very closely during those years. And when we decided to start a podcast back in 2018 and we were thinking of what to call it and we came up with all sorts of really boring bad names and streets pod no and [laughter] um and so I just blurted out one day I was like you know what this podcast is this is the podcast of the war on cars and we all laughed and then we said wait that's it. So yes, it's basically we're trying to take back from people like the late Rob Ford. We're trying to we're trying to take that and okay, we'll we'll we'll appropriate that for ourselves. You want to call us the war on cars? Okay, maybe we will be. And so yes, there is a tongue-in-cheek nature to it. I've had a lot of people say that the name of the podcast is too confrontational. The truth is that in order to break through and get people's attention sometimes in media, you have to really try to shake things up a little bit.

历史的回响:超人也在对抗鲁莽司机

主持人: 我的意思是,这就是为什么 Rob Ford 会大肆宣扬“汽车战争”,因为他知道那是文化战争中的“红肉”(煽动性话题),这对他确实奏效了,他当选了。但我觉得有趣的是,你们回溯到了 20 世纪早期,发现那时候确实有过一场针对汽车的“战争”,或者至少有一场运动,因为当时有很多因车祸导致的死亡。我想你们更倾向于用“车祸”(car crashes)这个词而非“意外”。甚至在当时的《超人》漫画里也有体现。能给我们讲讲那个故事吗?超人是如何对抗鲁莽司机的?

Original English

Host: I mean, that's why Rob Ford screamed about uh a war on cars because he knew it was a like red meat for the culture war and he, you know, it worked for him, right? He he got elected. So, but I thought was interesting the you went back in into the early 20th century and there was kind of a war on cars or there was like at least a campaign because there were a lot of deaths from autoreated accidents or car crashes I think is the term you prefer. Um, and even in in the Superman comics of the day, you want to tell us that story. How how was Superman sort of fighting against uh reckless drivers?

Doug Gordon: 好的。我们的书开篇就提到了 1939 年出版的《动作漫画》(Action Comics)。在故事中,克拉克·肯特走出办公室,看到一个朋友被司机撞死了。于是他化身超人,对市长说:“对于这个影响我们城市的问题,你打算怎么办?”而市长的态度却是一种“谁也没办法”的无奈——这和今天许多市长的说法如出一辙。

接着,超人到处搞破坏:他摧毁了一家二手车交易场,摧毁了一个汽车制造商的停车场。他阻止了一名警察收受贿赂放走违章停车的人。他真正的对手不是莱克斯·卢瑟或外星人,而是汽车。因为在 20 世纪 30 年代,人们从未经历过像汽车带给北美城市那样大规模的机械化工业化死亡。唯一能与之相比的只有第一次世界大战

当时,人们把车祸受害者等同于战争受害者,等同于在战场上牺牲的士兵。甚至出现了“白星母亲”,她们在交通暴力中失去了孩子。当时有游行和纪念活动来呼吁关注这一问题。超人的创造者 ShusterSiegel 实际上出生在多伦多。

Original English

Doug Gordon: So, we open the book with uh Action Comics, which was published in 1939, where um Clark Kent comes out of his office and sees that a friend has been hit and killed by a driver. And Superman, Clark Kent then turns into Superman and says to the city's mayor like, "What are you doing about this problem that's affecting our city?" And the mayor sort of has a sort of what can anybody do feeling about it, which a a lot of mayors might say today. And Superman then goes around and he destroys a used car lot. He destroys um an automobile manufacturer's lot. He stops a cop from taking a bribe for a guy to get out of a parking ticket. Um and he's really battling this enemy. not Lex Luthther or some alien from outer space, but the car because at that time um in the 1930s, nobody had experienced mechanized industrial death on the scale that the automobile visited upon North American cities. The only thing close had been World War I. Um and at that time people were equating the victims of automobile crashes to the victims of war to soldiers who had been killed on the battlefield. There there were white star mothers who had lost children to traffic violence. There were parades and memorials to bring attention to this issue. And um you know Shuster and Seagull who actually I think were born here in Toronto. Um Shuster was

主持人: Shuster 确实是。

Original English

Host: Schustster was yeah

Doug Gordon: 当他们出生时,比如 1914 年到 1916 年间,车祸死亡人数约为 4700 人;但到这本漫画出版时,人数已激增至约 3.7 万。当时美国人口只有 1.3 亿到 1.4 亿左右,所以按人均计算,死亡率高达每 10 万人 30 人。他们经历过没有汽车的生活,目睹了越来越多的人被杀。对他们来说,仅仅是过马路就可能被杀,这在当时是令人愤慨的。

而今天,人们过马路被杀,大众的反应却是:“噢,他们做了什么才招致这种祸害?”

Original English

Doug Gordon: um you know when they were born there were something like 4700 people having been killed in car crashes in like 1914 1916 by the time that comic was published it was up to about 37,000 people at a time when the population of the US was about 130 140 million people so it was a a per capita rate that was just like 30 people per 100,000 so at that time they would have known a life before cars they would have seen more and more people getting killed. It would have been outrageous to them that you could just get killed walking across the street. Today, you know, people get killed walking across the street and the reaction is, "Oh, what did they do to deserve it?"

主持人: 是的,现在更倾向于归咎于个人。

Original English

Host: Yeah. It's more individualized.

Doug Gordon: 是的。“他们穿了一身黑”、“他们在看手机”或者“他们醉酒步行”。我们从来没有真正停下来问:第一,那个司机在做什么?第二,看看我们构建的这个系统——仅仅是处理日常事务的代价,就可能是死亡或受伤。这是我们已经接受的另一种荒谬:仅仅因为某人需要开车去买菜,全美每年就有 4 万多人死亡,全球超过 100 万人死亡。这种代价竟然是死亡,对我来说太荒谬了。

Original English

Doug Gordon: Yeah. They were wearing all black or they were looking at their phone or they were drunk and walking. And we never really stopped to say, number one, what was the driver doing? But number two, look at the system we've built where just the cost of going about your daily business might be that you die or get injured. That's another part of the absurdity that we've just accepted, you know, 40ish thousand deaths in the US alone, a million plus worldwide because someone needs to drive to get groceries. Like the cost could be death. That is absurd to me.

出行工具箱:回归多元选择

主持人: 你会怎么回应那些人?我是说,我们在安大略省,这是一个很大的省份,地理上比法国和英国加起来还要大。很多地方没有车根本没法生活,你哪儿也去不了,除非你打算走上很久。对于那些坚称某些地方“就是需要车”的人,你怎么看?

Original English

Host: What do you say to someone? I mean, you know, we're in Ontario, which is a big province. I mean, geographically, I think it's bigger than France and the UK combined is what I've been told. Um, and there's just a lot of places you you just can't live without a car. I mean, you can't get around, otherwise you're going to be walking for a while. Um, I guess what do you say to those folks who say that, yeah, you kind of just need a car in certain places.

Doug Gordon: 我会说,没问题,那就用车。汽车是一种工具,就像你厨房抽屉里有不同的餐具,有时你需要汤匙,有时你需要牛排刀,取决于你吃什么。

取决于你去哪儿和你进行什么样的旅程,一辆小车可能非常合适。但如果你只是去买点菜,开一辆巨大的福特 F-150 恐怕有点杀鸡用牛排刀了。如果你要去露营,或者拖一艘船,那它就是一个很棒的工具。当我带家人去露营旅行时,我也开车,因为那是现阶段最方便、最好的方式;但我会骑自行车去杂货店,或者步行到公交站去上班。

我把出行看作是那个装满工具的厨房抽屉:对于我正在做的工作,什么是正确的工具?如果正确工具是汽车,那我们就用。由于我们要巡回宣传,有时必须开车从公交无法到达的机场前往市中心。我们别无选择。

所以我们承认每个人都在这个系统内运作。而且总会有一些地方,汽车确实是完成工作的最佳工具。我们只是倾向于认为,在人口稠密的城市中心,汽车并不总是适合所有人的最佳工具。问题在于,如果你不想开车,你并没有太多的选择。比如在欧洲,有成百上千个城市你可以不用车也生活得很舒适。而在北美,这样的城市屈指可数。

我们倡导的是让更多的城市为人们提供这些选项。北美有很多人口稠密的城市和街区,它们本可以拥有更好的公交、更好的自行车道、更好的人行道,从而给人们提供选择。有时,这可能意味着一个四口之家不需要拥有四辆车,也许只有一两辆。这些都是可以分步实现的增量改变。当你面对这种规模的问题时,增量改变是必要的,对吧?

但如果说“只要你住在北美,你就必须拥有一辆车”,这在我看来才是一个激进的立场。我认为更合理的立场应该是:我们有这么多拥有密集市中心和相对密集居住区的城市,难道在这些地方不应该拥有更多的出行选择,从而减少对那些向你兜售化石燃料和汽车的跨国公司的依赖吗?

人们可能想要选择。有时想象一个拥有更多选择的世界,甚至去希望拥有这样一个世界,是令人恐惧的。但实际上,我们所倡导的仅仅是更多的选项。

Original English

Doug Gordon: I would say cool, use a car. A a car is a tool and just like you have different utensils in your kitchen drawer and sometimes you need a soup spoon and sometimes you need a steak knife depending on what you're eating. Depending on where you're going and what type of trip you're making, you know, a small car might be perfectly fine. A giant Ford F-150 is probably a bit of overkill if you're just going to get groceries. If you're going camping, it might be a perfect or you're to, you know, towing a boat. That's a great tool to use. I use a car when I take a camping trip with my family because it's the easiest and best way, but I ride a bike to the grocery store or I walk to the transit stop to get to work. And I think of mobility like that kitchen drawer of tools, like what's the right tool for the job I'm doing? And if it's a car, we've had to drive on tour to get, you know, from airports that are not accessible to the downtown by transit. What's the choice? And so we recognize that everybody is operating within this system, but also there are always going to be places where a car is going to be the best tool for the job. We just tend to not think that the middle of a dense city is the best place at all times for all people. The problem is that there aren't a lot of choices if you don't want to drive a car. In Europe, for instance, there are hundreds of cities that you could live in comfortably without a car. In North America, there are a handful of cities where you can live comfortably and really fully participate in the civic life of the city. What we advocate is for more cities to provide those options for people. There are a lot of dense cities and dense parts of cities in North America, you know, that could have better transit, better bike lanes, better sidewalks, and then that would give people options. And sometimes it's, you know, for a family of four to not have to have four cars. Maybe they only have one car or two cars. You know, these are the kinds of things it can be an incremental change. And I think incremental change is necessary when you're facing problems of this scale, right? But to say that, well, if you live in North America, you just have to own a car like that that seems that seems like a radical position to me. You know, I think that what's a much more reasonable position is to say, well, we have all of these cities that have dense downtowns and relatively dense residential neighborhoods. Shouldn't those places be ones where you can have more choices about having to get around and less dependence on these multinational corporations that are selling you fossil fuels and automobiles? You know, I think that people might want choices and it's frightening sometimes to imagine a world in which there are more choices or to even hope for one, but you know, really that's what we're advocating is is to just have more options.

汽车行业与汽车爱好者的共鸣

主持人: 你们见过在汽车行业工作的人吗?他们怎么说?我知道我有亲戚在汽车行业工作,它雇佣了很多人。当你告诉他们这些时,他们有什么反应?

Original English

Host: Do you ever meet people who work in the auto industry? Like do they ever what do they say? Because I I know I've had cousins who've worked in the auto industry. It employs a lot of people. What do they say to you when you tell them

Doug Gordon: 当然,这里涉及到就业的一面。这些是巨大的行业,它们不会消失,我们也不应该消灭它们。我们经常谈论“公正转型”——比如制造汽车的人可以去制造公共交通工具。这会是替代那些对加拿大、美国和许多国家都至关重要的工会职位的绝佳方式。

有趣的是,我们有很多汽车爱好者也听我们的节目。他们会说:“我喜欢开车,我喜欢捯饬我的车,我也喜欢你们的节目——因为我讨厌堵车。”

我们经常说,如果你热爱驾驶,如果开车上班是你的乐趣,你享受那 40 分钟左右听音乐、独处的时间,那很好。但你应该希望路上每一个其他的人都能拥有骑行或坐公交的选择。所以汽车爱好者和汽车行业的人其实是能理解这一点的。

而且我认为你观察一下现在的汽车行业就能发现,他们自己也意识到产品出现了问题,人们并不想要它。你看,现在的汽车广告大多不再谈论汽车的功能,有些甚至在谈论交通堵塞有多严重,以及躲进你的“小隔离舱”里放松一下是多么美好。

人们总把自行车看作老掉牙的技术,其实汽车在一百年里也没变多少。现在是电动的了,但当年也有电动的。安全功能变了,但四个轮子、一个方向盘、四五个座位,基本还是一样。所以确实有汽车行业的人跟我们说:“是的,我们懂。”甚至福特汽车公司的负责人也说过,也许未来福特会成为一家“出行公司”,为人们提供不同形式的出行服务,而不仅仅是你必须拥有的那一辆车。

Original English

Doug Gordon: Well, there's the employment side of it, of course. Like these are huge industries and they're not going away nor should we get rid of them right we talk a lot about a just transition like the people building automobiles like they could be building public transit vehicles that would be a really great way to switch one for one these union jobs that are so important to Canada to the United States to a lot of countries but um a lot of we have a lot of car enthusiasts who listen to the show and what they will say is that I love driving I love working on my car and I love your show because I hate traffic. And what we often say is that if you love driving, if driving to work is your jam, you know, and you love the 40 minutes or so that you get to listen to music, have your alone time, cool. What you should want is for every other person on the road to have the option to bike or take transit instead. And so the car enthusiasts and people in the auto industry, they sort of get it. And I also think you can look at the auto industry right now and get that they understand they have a really bad product that people just don't want. Um, you know, most of the car ads don't talk about the features of the car anymore. Some car ads talk about how bad traffic is and how like isn't it nice to just relax in your little isolation chamber? Um, they just have a, you know, people talk about bicycles as this old-fashioned technology. The car hasn't changed all that much either in a hundred years. It's electric now. There were electric back then. Safety features have changed, but four wheels and a steering wheel and four seats, five seats, that's pretty much the same. Um, so we do have folks in the auto industry who say, "Yeah, we get it." Um, and even the head of Ford Motor Company has said that like maybe in the future Ford will be a mobility company, selling people different forms of mobility than just a car that you need.

行动指南:如何摆脱汽车依赖?

主持人: 也许我们可以最后谈谈,人们有哪些方法可以摆脱对汽车的依赖?

Original English

Host: Well, maybe we can end on just some ways that people can wean themselves off the our car dependence.

Sarah Goodyear: 每个人在自己的生活中都可以做很多有趣且重要的事情。其中之一就是,如果你的生活中有其他选项,就给自己设定一个挑战,少用车。如果你有时可以步行,或者可以骑车,那就尝试一下。看看感觉如何。也许给自己一周或一个月的时间,说“我要少用车”。

我认为你可能会体验到一种与社区建立联系的新方式。即便你只是把车停在离杂货店稍远一点的地方,步行几个街区穿过社区,你可能会看到从未见过的邻居、商店或事物。

此外,假设你想尝试坐公交,但你有点害怕,因为你不知道它是如何运作的,或者对此感到畏缩。毕竟在这个大陆上,很多人并不真正懂得如何使用城市。他们可能从小就没坐过公交,所以这看起来令人生畏。那么,也许你有一个坐公交上班的朋友,问问他们:“嘿,你能带我坐一次吗?”或者如果你是那个坐公交的人,主动邀请别人:“我来当你的‘公交搭档’或‘骑行搭档’,教你如何操作。”这可能就开始解锁各种可能性。

我认为这是一件非常简单的事。但为了能做到这些,你需要有公交可坐,有自行车道可骑,有人行道可走。这就是政治意志发挥作用的地方。

Original English

Sarah Goodyear: You know, there are a lot of things that individuals can do in their own lives that I think are really interesting and important. And one of them is to just give yourself a challenge to use the car less in your own life if there are options. If you can walk sometimes, if you can ride a bike, if that is available to you, just try it. See how it feels. and maybe give yourself a week or a month where you say, "I'm going to use the car less." Um, I think that what you might experience is a new kind of engagement with your own community. Even if you're doing something like parking farther away from the store that you're going to and walking a few blocks through the community, you might see people, you might see stores, you might see things that you you never would have seen before. So, that's that's one way of doing it. And let's say that you you want to try using transit, but you're scared of using transit because you don't know how it works or you you're intimidated by it in some way because a lot of people in this continent anyway don't really know how to use cities very well. They maybe didn't grow up using transit and so that seems intimidating to them. Well, but maybe you have that friend at work who does take transit. ask them, "Hey, would you ride with me, you know, or if you're the person who does take transit, offer that to somebody else? I'll be your transit buddy. I'll be your bike buddy and show you how it works." And then it might start to unlock possibilities. I I think that's one really simple thing that you can do, but in order to do it, you need transit to ride and bike lanes to ride in and sidewalks to walk on. And that's where political will comes in.

Doug Gordon: 我还建议人们寻找像 Cycle Toronto 这样的倡导组织,或者行人权利组织。找到那些致力于此的人,询问你能如何提供帮助,或者获取出行的小贴士。

但政治意志确实至关重要。我认为骑行者或想更多步行和坐公交的人需要做的是——组织起来。寻找志同道合的人。我们在书里也谈到了这一点:找到你的同类。去和社区里的人交流。很多人觉得自己是个“怪胎”,因为他们想骑车去买菜、骑车去上班。如果你开始与人交谈,你会发现你并不孤单。

只要两三个人一起去参加公共会议,或者给你的市议员打电话,就能产生影响。他们通常是非常容易联系到的。告诉他们:“嘿,我听说有计划要在街上建自行车道,我们支持这个计划。”因为你要知道,议员们肯定会听到反对者的声音。

所以,大声说出来,成为一股政治力量。即便是几个人也可以做到。当然,你也确实需要那些有远见的当选官员,他们知道这是正确的事。但很少有这样的人是自发产生的。他们之所以出现,是因为有草根联盟告诉他们:“嘿,我们想要一些不一样的改变,如果你做了正确的事,我们会支持你。”

所以,当你的当选官员做了好事时,告诉他们。当他们做了错事,礼貌地告诉他们也许该换个做法。总之,成为一股政治力量。

Original English

Doug Gordon: I would also recommend people find advocacy groups like Cycle Toronto and pedestrian advocacy groups that find the people who are working on this and either ask how you can help or for just tips on how to get around. But yeah, the political will is just huge. And I think the thing that people who bike or people who want to walk and take transit more need to do is get organized. Find other people who are like-minded. One of the things we talk about in the book literally is just find your people. Talk to people in your community. A lot of people feel like, "Oh, I'm the weirdo. I want to bike to the grocery store. I want to bike to work." If you start talking to people, you might find that you're not alone. And then all it takes is two or three of you to go to a public meeting or to call your city council person. They're usually very accessible and say, "Hey, you know, I hear there's a plan to maybe put a bike lane on the street. We're in favor of that." because you know they're going to hear from the people who are against it. Um so I think you know speaking up and becoming a political constituency. Look, you do need those like forwardthinking elected officials who know that this is the right thing to do. Very few of those people pop up organically. They pop up because of the grassroots coalition that says, "Hey, we want something different and we will support you, the elected official, if you do good things." So when your elected officials do good things, tell them. When they do bad things, politely tell them maybe they should do something else. But like become a political force. You can with just a few people.

主持人: 这是一个很好的结尾。Doug、Sarah,非常感谢你们。这太棒了。

Original English

Host: Well, that's a great place to leave it. Doug, Sarah, thank you so much, guys. This is great.

Sarah Goodyear: 非常感谢。

Original English

Sarah Goodyear: Thanks so much.

📌 文中提及的人物和组织

关键字: car-dependency urban-planning active-transportation mobility-choices environmental-impact