Communities here are largely influenced and based on already existing communities on Reddit. I was subscribed to r/fuckcars there until I dropped reddit completely, but they have a pretty straightforward page explaining their beliefs and opinions about cars and replacing them with various different more efficient transportation methods.

Secondly... Your comment wasn't hated, so I don't know where those "angry car haters" come from.

No one actually thinks that you can replace cars entirely, but making more space FOR PEOPLE on the streets and making public transportation more comfortable and more affordable - is only a positive.

I don't think anyone seriously thinks you can actually get rid of cars entirely, but rather they're annoyed that everything is built around the idea that you drive everywhere. This is damaging to the environment, human health, and probably even stifles community and culture.

Many folks see car culture as connected to other social problems, such as:

• Environmental degradation — pollution, climate change
• Suburban decay — neighborhoods with lots of parking but no public life
• Violent crime — road rage, throwing shit at bicyclists, coal rolling
• Long driving commutes — extending the work day for hours of unpaid labor
• Injury & death — driving & being around cars is the most dangerous thing most people do every day

Folks raising awareness about these issues, or just yelling about them, are probably not interested in having a debate right then.

Have a look in the communities. Reading the community explains the community. Their main problem is that most cities are built and often rebuilt to only work with cars and then people use that to claim that other systems doesn't work.

It is mostly serious. There is plenty of scientific evidence on how car centric infrastructure, city planning and policies have destroyed walkable cities and require an in proportion extreme amount of space and accommodations. Cars as a means of transportation are wholly inefficient, you could put several dozen daily commuters into a single bus, multiple times that in a single subway train.

The only space where cars are not short term replaceable to great improvement of the general habitability of the area is in rural regions where distances are huge, people are spread out widely and communal infrastructure is simply too inflexible to accommodate the needs of the citizens.

It's more of a "fuck car dependent infrastructure" thing. In America it's basically impossible to live without a car in most places. We don't need to live this way and we should have the option to walk, bike, bus, train, etc as well as drive.

Try walking to the grocery store in a suburb and you'll quickly get sick of walking through big empty parking lots and along roads without sidewalks as cars whip past. I wouldn't even try biking since drivers will run you off the road. If there even is a bus it'll run every 2 hours and be 15 minutes late. And there is no train because we tore up the rail system that built this country to make auto company owners even richer

When people say "fuck cars", they usually mean "fuck car-centric infrastructure" (though some do really hate cars).
Having a diverse set of options focusing on walkability and public transportation doesn't mean the elimination of cars. It just means that everyone isn't forced to use a car to do just about anything. As a car-lover myself, I hate sitting on traffic. Makes the car I carefully chose to be just a glorified AC box. I hate sharing the road with 90 year old geriatrics, kids taking their parent's car for a joyride, and bar-hopping drunk drivers. In a non-car centric neighborhood, they could all just walk/take public transpo to buy eggs, go to the arcade, or go home safely when they're drunk.

Trains and short range motor bikes or human powered bikes can definitely replace cars. The problem is the city needs to be designed for it. It can't replace it in most places in the US because all infrastructure has been biased towards cars for more than 100 years. But if you imagine a city built from the ground up with trains and bikes in mind it is completely doable.

It's going to take another century to undo the car centric society we have built in the US.

Yes.

I suppose what I'd ask you is: are you an expert in urban or transport infrastructure? Because, if not — and I say this in the politest way possible — the argument you made was probably a fairly basic one that people have heard a thousand times before. Your gloss of it here as 'trains cannot replace cars' suggests to me that you're not really engaged with the issue (nobody thinks 'trains can replace cars').

Essentially what you did is the equivalent of me going into a Christian community and saying, 'But if God exists, why is there evil in the world?' as though no Christian had ever engaged with that idea, then acting surprised when people started rolling their eyes at me.

Yes, they're serious. The problem isn't that some cars exist, it's car dependency. Car infrastructure is inefficient, expensive and takes up enormous amounts of space. It's also ugly and loud. Cities built around cars get very spread out, so walking, cycling or public transport become inefficient or unsafe options. As a result, you have to drive, whether you want to or not. If you want to go literally anywhere, you have to get into your car and deal with traffic. But it doesn't have to be that way. Cities built around walkability, cycling and public transport are not only more efficient, but also much more pleasant, even for those who still want to or have to drive. Good alternatives to cars are the only way to really improve traffic. The idea isn't to just get rid of all cars but to make it so you don't need one.

If you want to learn more about good urban planning, check out the excellent YouTube channel Not Just Bikes to get much better explanations of these concepts. I especially recommend the series about Strong Towns as an introduction.

No they're real. Some people are just extremely passionate about disliking cars, mostly due to environmental impact vs the greener alternatives although there are likely other reasons too.

With what I've seen of the US, I can see why many people over there would unironically hate cars. Car-centric planning has all but ruined the walkability of most US cities to the point of making it almost obligatory to own a car.

Come over to Europe and you'll be able to see the difference that planning has had clear as day.

Up until this moment, I was CERTAIN these were nsfw communities.

But yeah, fuck car centric infrastructures. People owning cars and driving cars... You can't blame or hate the individuals who are just trying to survive. But you can absolutely hate how shitty the availability and maintenance of public transport often is (I hear it's especially bad in the US?) and the car lobbying, which I hear is especially bad here in Germany. Profits are always prioritised, and the car industry is considered more profitable than providing good, affordable public transport.

People don't like cars lol. Fuck cars is basically the cars version of ACAB.

Understandable, but off putting to some people.

Really interested in hearing OPs response to these explanations

Yes. They hate cars a lot and prefer bike riding.

The folks agreeing with you in that thread were much more toxic than the folks who offered legitimate rebuttals to your comment. Honest question, but what about any of those responses set you off?

/dragonsfuckingcars is a meme. /fuckcars is not