Whenever some mainstream american outlet like Bloomberg says something is a conspiracy theory, I immediately err on the side of caution and assume that it actually IS a criminal conspiracy, and that there will be plenty of evidence within two years that turns this headline into another cautionary tale.
15 minute cities are a great idea if you are building a new city, not partitioning an existing urban landscape into monitored zones.
Articles like those generally take a very shallow approach to peoples concerns, calling them things like conspiracies. Policies for 15 minute cities and policies for Low Emissions Zone are separate kind of policies, but in a two-party system it is very likely that a political party is in favor of either both or neither. Voters do not have the choice of selecting one but not the other, so the two policies get lumped together.
Looking at other countries in Europe, all (or most of them) seem to require some kind of extra registration and monitoring when it comes to Low Emissions Zone. Again, technically there is nothing that requires low emission zones to implement heavy handed registration and monitoring, but as has been demonstrated they do tend to go together. Even in countries with multi-party system, there is generally no party to vote for which want Low Emissions Zone without the inclusion of extra registration and monitoring.
Promoting 15 minutes cities is a great way to reduce carbon emissions of the general population.
If you want to look at it from a conspiracy perspective it allows humanity to slow down global warming slightly while corporations and wealthy people can still pump out as much carbon as they can afford and require.
But from experience, living in a 15 minute city IS nice IF the infrastructure is good and crime is low. Still a good part of the workforce will need to commute outside of this 15 minute area, which needs further investment into rails and roads to bring blue collar workers quickly to factories and warehouses.
“City blocks road to through traffic, drivers have to take ring road instead” is not usually headline news around the world, but here we are.
I’m not sure why this story has resonated so strongly with the conspiracy theorists out there, but I guess it’s some wild cross-pollination between the idea that the world government is out to control everyone & hearing the phrase “15 minute neighbourhood” and jumping straight to the most insane conclusion possible.
The only place I've encountered this particular conspiracy theory is via articles debunking the conspiracy theory.
I don't doubt that deep in the bowels of conspiracy theory web sites, they've found something to occupy their next fifteen minutes of mutual outrage. But has this actually appeared anywhere else, or is this just news outlets looking for some outrage to report on?
I haven't seen it as a live usage. Not that my anecdote means anything; I try to live in a bubble that filters out the stupidest people. So I'm unclear if this is actually going to result in real pushback on urban planning, or just noise.
The thing I don't get about this concept is what about heavy industries, how do all the employees of a shipyard live within 15 minutes of it while still allowing room for all the people that support the shipwrights? It doesn't sound like a threat to civil liberties, it sounds like an agrarian, luddite pipe dream.
"15 minutes" is about urban planning, not about control of the population.
It doesn't mean you'll have an obligation to live within 15 minutes enclosure around your house. It means you'll be able to walk or bike to any necessity in 15 minutes, so it'll make your life easier. You can still go to your favorite convenience store half an hour away if you want, but you CAN instead go to a corner shop.
Honestly as a European I fail to understand what's even controversial about that.
Not everyone has to live within 15 min of their job, just most people or at least significantly more people than now. There will always be exceptions. The exception proves the rule as they say.
Reducing car-dependency is great. The car-dependent lifestyle and urban planning is the Cigarrettes of the 21st century. When/if we manage to move our socity away from that, we will look back and ask: What were we thinking?
Wait, I thought the 15 minute city idea was about reasonable mixed-purpose zoning and public transit, and now it is about limiting car access to cities?
Yes they are. We already figured this scam out. It's a part of what used to be called Agenda 2020, now Agenda 2030 - corral everybody into cities. It's been openly discussed and apparently this program is being implemented in various ways, largely funded by Soros and WEF people who like to meddle in local politics. It's important to make people aware of what bureaucrats have decided is to be the future so people are at least informed. All this stuff's been on the UN and WEF's web sites for years, so I won't hear any talk about it being a conspiracy theory.
You've already gone from globalist agencies to putting a person's name in there, do you want to go just that one step further and suggest anything "those people" have in common?
You can willfully misread and misinterpret public documents all you want, but at least be honest about why you keep referring to "Soros and WEF people" like they're a shadowy cabal.
As the saying goes, the devils are in the details. It's natural for people latch onto these speculative videos because it's unclear what policies will be justified within this 15-minute city movement.
I agree with the article: The movement needs to be crystal clear on what's within scope and what's out of scope to alleviate fear and misinformation.
Concrete hellscapes is certainly a treat to freedom. They are designed to extract value from humans efficiently, while the end beneficiaries of this madness wisely choose to live on private islands, around the nature.
As I recall the concern was related to limiting the number of automobile trips residents could take outside of their designated zones. The article did not attempt to address these concerns. Instead they heaped derision on "conspiracy theorists".
I did a quick google search for supporting articles. Unsurprisingly, I was bombarded with "debunk" articles similar in tone. The top result was the WEF. Here's a citation from an aligned write-up:
>They’re right that the traffic cameras will restrict their freedom to drive around town.
If people wish to live in dense urban communities, they can do so voluntarily. There's nothing wrong with individuals making these value judgments and finding the communities on a voluntary basis. The concerns are related to the use of coercion. The article talks past these concerns.
Finally, the narrative of "climate lockdowns" has been advanced by the same voices. As have personal carbon credits connected to a social credit score and a central bank digital currency. Perhaps partisans paint these concerns as unhinged extremism because they have no way to legitimately address these concerns.
Say what you will of the so called "extremist conspiracy theorists" here, but I wouldn't paint them as the authoritarians in this context. The dangers of these authoritarian policies should be plain to see. Attempting to talk past the concerns and malign them as nuttery feels dishonest.
>Does more media censorship imply more regime stability? We argue that censorship may cause mass disapproval for censoring regimes. In particular, we expect that censorship backfires when citizens can falsify media content through alternative sources of information. We empirically test our theoretical argument in an autocratic regime—the German Democratic Republic (GDR).
Sure a 15 minute city means there will be some areas you won't be able to drive to anymore. So what? You'd be able to walk to them in <15 min. Nobody is going to stop people from driving out of town to go camping.
[+] [-] pangolinja|3 years ago|reply
15 minute cities are a great idea if you are building a new city, not partitioning an existing urban landscape into monitored zones.
[+] [-] belorn|3 years ago|reply
Looking at other countries in Europe, all (or most of them) seem to require some kind of extra registration and monitoring when it comes to Low Emissions Zone. Again, technically there is nothing that requires low emission zones to implement heavy handed registration and monitoring, but as has been demonstrated they do tend to go together. Even in countries with multi-party system, there is generally no party to vote for which want Low Emissions Zone without the inclusion of extra registration and monitoring.
[+] [-] sys42590|3 years ago|reply
If you want to look at it from a conspiracy perspective it allows humanity to slow down global warming slightly while corporations and wealthy people can still pump out as much carbon as they can afford and require.
But from experience, living in a 15 minute city IS nice IF the infrastructure is good and crime is low. Still a good part of the workforce will need to commute outside of this 15 minute area, which needs further investment into rails and roads to bring blue collar workers quickly to factories and warehouses.
[+] [-] pja|3 years ago|reply
I’m not sure why this story has resonated so strongly with the conspiracy theorists out there, but I guess it’s some wild cross-pollination between the idea that the world government is out to control everyone & hearing the phrase “15 minute neighbourhood” and jumping straight to the most insane conclusion possible.
[+] [-] jfengel|3 years ago|reply
I don't doubt that deep in the bowels of conspiracy theory web sites, they've found something to occupy their next fifteen minutes of mutual outrage. But has this actually appeared anywhere else, or is this just news outlets looking for some outrage to report on?
I haven't seen it as a live usage. Not that my anecdote means anything; I try to live in a bubble that filters out the stupidest people. So I'm unclear if this is actually going to result in real pushback on urban planning, or just noise.
[+] [-] helsinkiandrew|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] elguyosupremo|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] thiht|3 years ago|reply
It doesn't mean you'll have an obligation to live within 15 minutes enclosure around your house. It means you'll be able to walk or bike to any necessity in 15 minutes, so it'll make your life easier. You can still go to your favorite convenience store half an hour away if you want, but you CAN instead go to a corner shop.
Honestly as a European I fail to understand what's even controversial about that.
[+] [-] xputer|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] thecopy|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ravel-bar-foo|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] morelisp|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] steponlego|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pwinnski|3 years ago|reply
You can willfully misread and misinterpret public documents all you want, but at least be honest about why you keep referring to "Soros and WEF people" like they're a shadowy cabal.
[+] [-] wolpoli|3 years ago|reply
I agree with the article: The movement needs to be crystal clear on what's within scope and what's out of scope to alleviate fear and misinformation.
[+] [-] egberts1|3 years ago|reply
This kind of stuff won't fly in United States, thankfully.
[+] [-] aaron695|3 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] egberts1|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] thiht|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] akomtu|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] aww_dang|3 years ago|reply
I did a quick google search for supporting articles. Unsurprisingly, I was bombarded with "debunk" articles similar in tone. The top result was the WEF. Here's a citation from an aligned write-up:
>They’re right that the traffic cameras will restrict their freedom to drive around town.
https://slate.com/business/2023/02/15-minute-city-oxford-con....
If people wish to live in dense urban communities, they can do so voluntarily. There's nothing wrong with individuals making these value judgments and finding the communities on a voluntary basis. The concerns are related to the use of coercion. The article talks past these concerns.
Finally, the narrative of "climate lockdowns" has been advanced by the same voices. As have personal carbon credits connected to a social credit score and a central bank digital currency. Perhaps partisans paint these concerns as unhinged extremism because they have no way to legitimately address these concerns.
Say what you will of the so called "extremist conspiracy theorists" here, but I wouldn't paint them as the authoritarians in this context. The dangers of these authoritarian policies should be plain to see. Attempting to talk past the concerns and malign them as nuttery feels dishonest.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ajps.12501
>Does more media censorship imply more regime stability? We argue that censorship may cause mass disapproval for censoring regimes. In particular, we expect that censorship backfires when citizens can falsify media content through alternative sources of information. We empirically test our theoretical argument in an autocratic regime—the German Democratic Republic (GDR).
[+] [-] xputer|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] leereeves|3 years ago|reply
"When [the traffic filters] are operating, private cars will not be allowed through the filters without a permit."[1]
"Residents ... will be able to apply for a permit to drive through the traffic filters for up to 100 days per year"[1]
So this "conspiracy theory" is in fact literally true, the planners admit it, and these articles are lying.
https://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/sites/default/files/file/road...