The Physical Politics of the Thing

‘Politics’ as a general term describes the way groups make decisions about issues that affect that group. Some of this decision making is deliberative, as you might see in government. Some of it is performative, again, like you might see in government. Some of it is confrontational, again….

So physical politics is about how a group decides to use the space available to it.

And of course, different cultures have different approaches to the way they use space. For example, if I go to Whole Foods, the shoppers maintain distance. They seem to feel entitled to room. There’s a lot of ‘excuse me,’ happening there. At H-Mart, the Asian grocery I go to, there is no space. No one says, ‘excuse me.’ People stand close, reach across one another. These approaches are different, and frankly I’m not sure which I prefer, but I mention them only as example of how you might experience physical politics in the real world.

People on bikes have their own politics. The clearest example is in a Paceline, where spacing is of paramount importance, and placement and roles are well-defined and agreed upon by the group. Mountain biking has a similar sense of where you should be (not right behind the rider in front of you) and where you shouldn’t (off in the trees), but those rules are looser. We have tacit rules for who has the right of way on a trail, etc., although they seem to be seldom observed.

The creation of bike lanes is another sort of physical politics. A deliberative process leads to the idea that, for safety, a space should be assigned to bike riders. When cars park in the bike lane, they’re making a political statement. They don’t think cyclists are entitled to that space. Oh, they’ll tell you they’re just picking up takeout, but that’s not really all they’re doing.

Similarly, when a rider or group of riders ‘takes the lane’ they’re saying something physically political. They are entitled to that space. They are equal road users. Etc. Last week, I observed a group of about 8 riding through the center of town. There’s a bike lane there, but this group was spread across the whole road, and they were holding cars up behind them. Traffic was moving slowly anyway. No one honked or seemed to get bent out of shape.

But as a rider myself, I wondered if they were doing the cycling community a political disservice. Around here, bikes are legally entitled to the lane, and the way bike lanes get abused by parked cars that’s only fair. When a cyclist needs the lane, they should take it. My issue is whether they should take it when they don’t need it. Like, those guys could have, and I think should have, ridden single file through town. It’s safer all around, and it works out best for everyone in the space.

I’m torn on my attitude though, and maybe you can help me with it. No matter where I am, I try to take everyone into account. I think it all works better when we work together to share the space. However, cyclists and certainly pedestrians are far more vulnerable in paved spaces, so I’m wondering if more let’s say gratuitous  use of the lane isn’t actually a good idea. It normalizes the situation where drivers slow down for bikes.

What do you think?