You accuse others of childish banality yet the only condescending jackass in this discussion is you as you lob insults and talk down to people.
News flash, walkable cities and public transit are better for disabled people than cars. Have a person in a wheel chair try to drive a car. Lets a blind person peel out on a motorcycle why don’t you you dipshit? Know how easy it is for a paraplegic to use a subway? They take a ramp or elevator down then roll on and off the cars as they please. Know how a blind person can get around without needing a friend with a car? They can make their way to a bus station where they can be taken across town.
Oh and finally, a “car ban”? Who mentioned flatly banning cars you disingenuous idiot? We want to design infrastructure for more than just cars, not ban them.
One way to come across as childishly banal and negative is to rant at someone for how bad of a person they are because of your own idiotic assumptions about their position.
You’re an insanely unserious person so log off and look into what people are actually advocating for instead of swallowing gallons of bullshit from people that know better. It’s unbecoming of someone with your smug sense of superiority.
Look up the Beecher report (hopefully I got the name right) to find out what happened to your trains. It was politicians getting bought by car manufacturers.
No they’d just be happy that there’s less people they have to convince to vote for them. Less people voting means it’s easier to pass policies that enrich them. You aren’t doing some meaningful protest, you’ve removed yourself from the conversation.
There’s tons of money in seeding voter apathy and people like you are why. They get you to remove your own voice and make you think you’re hurting them and not yourself.
You know the issues you’re bringing up aren’t caused by public transit, right? You’re so emotional over this and tear down the idea of public transit instead of giving a shit about mental healthcare in your country.
So now neither issue is solved, interesting perspective. You ever consider that traffic might be better for people like you who are deathly afraid of interacting with others if more people use public transportation?
Because no one’s talked about forcing you on a bus or flatly banning the existence of cars. You’re latching onto a hyper exaggerated scenario so you can act hysterical while feeling justified. You aren’t, you just have a small mind that’s easily manipulated into being against your own best interests.
As it stands now everyone needs to invest thousands of dollars to acquire and maintain something that is essentially required to participate in modern society. If you like doing that then more power to you, but everyone else just wants to have a choice.
No one’s saying you can’t do anything. I’m simply explaining that your “protest” is ignorable at best and actively beneficial to the people you hate at worst.
Like you said, language evolves. People are deciding that the definition you follow is very limited and constrains dialogue by being needlessly exclusionary. So they’re seeking to expand the definition to its logical conclusion.
You can throw a fit about other Semitic people being recognized or you can accept that language changes to fit our current understanding of the world.
Antisemitism still refers to prejudice against Jewish people. It’s also being extended to all Semitic people as to disallow them the ability to categorize prejudice against them is to obfuscate and to an extent even deny their own reality.