Then I wondered about my motivations. From my viewpoint cars are a social ill, they cause pollution, contribute to global climate change, and encourage obesity. All of these things seem completely obvious to me, and are all reasons to start reengineering, society to eliminate the need for cars.
And then I realized something that separates me from many others; I am strongly motivated tby the common good.
I know that linux is more inconvienent to use, yet I still use it. Because using it helps develop the world of free software, in my small part I try to help make it easier to use, encourage other users, and provide help for those who need it. I do it because I think that a world with less dependence on large corporations (like microsoft) would be a better world. I am enamored of the idea that a group of people can work together for a common goal, for no economic reward and actually produce useful stuff. Linux's success shows that the for-profit corporation is not the only way to organize a society--and that makes me happy.
So for me cars represent the source of several social ills, the breakdown of communities, air pollution, global climate change, obesity, and financial slavery (to one's bank).
So for these crimes, it seems obvious to me that to improve the common welfare of life on earth we must curtail the use of cars. (And other thing bad for the environment).
Now, this doesn't seem remotely obvious to anyone else.
And finally I'm beginning to understand why. Cars are convenient, the provide status, a sense of power, and for those who've been crippled by their dependence (such as an inability to walk a block) the ability to move.
One fortune quote I've seen recently is "An american is a man with 1 head, 2 arms, and 4 wheels"
I've realized that most people aren't willing to accept inconvenience for the common welfare. The nicer ones will help the common goods if it's not inconvienent, the more selfish ones will abuse the common good for because it's there.
I'm a freak; too idealistic for my own good.