The Automobile and Personal Autonomy, Essay Example

In the book “Stop Signs: Cars and Capitalism on the road to economic, social and ecological decay” authors Yves Engler and Bianca Mugyenyi examine the way that the automobile is embedded in and intertwined with American and global society. In the first section of the book, Engler and Mugyenyi take the logical and appropriate course of writing a travelogue of the United States as seen from an outsider’s perspective. In this instance, the outsider’s perspective is that of those who do not drive; viewed through this lens, the United States is a virtual monument to the automobile, built to make driving the central means by which people interact with the world. The hours spent driving to and from work, the roads designed for cars at the expense of pedestrian traffic, and the endless suburban landscapes that make it all but impossible for people to go anywhere without driving are all put under the microscope here. While the authors explore several key themes in their work, including the economic and ecological impact of living in such a car-centric world, it is the social impact of automobiles that underlines their real human costs. Although the automobile is ostensibly a symbol of American freedom and opportunity, argue Engler and Mugyenyi, the reality is that the objectification of the automobile limits personal autonomy at least as much, if not significantly more, than it promotes it.

In service of this larger point about personal autonomy, Engler and Mugyenyi open their book with a section entitled “Freedom – Fort Lauderdale.” The book is structured as a narrative, with the authors recounting their experiences in traveling from Montreal to a number of various cities, all while attempting to utilize mass transit, public transportation, pedestrian access, and the occasional taxi ride to get from one place to another. The authors begin by taking a bus from Montreal to the Florida city of Fort Lauderdale, where they almost immediately encounter a problem: they have been dropped off at the bus stop with no means of moving on to their final destination. As the authors note, “public transit was done for the day” (p.3), and the only option available to the weary travelers was to call for a taxi. In short, the authors had to hire a car (at significant expense) the moment they arrived at their destination. Their friend Nina from Montreal (now transplanted to Florida) had earlier mentioned that she “miss(ed) the freedom” of that Canadian city (p.2). While at first this struck the narrator as odd, it soon became clearer as the authors contrasted life in a number of American cities and towns with life in Montreal where public transportation and pedestrian access are an accepted fact of life.

The authors use a compelling rhetorical device to drive home their point about American dependence on cars: they posit the existence of a new species they call Homo Automotivis arising from “a century of people living with cars and capitalism”(p.4). While this is clearly intended as satire, it does underscore the manner in which human beings have become dependent on automobiles, and how those without them are often shut out of access to many aspects of society.  To illustrate this point the authors describe their first trek across the city of Fort Lauderdale, and their shock and confusion about the lack of pedestrians in such beautiful weather and the lack of cyclists in a land so flat it seemed built for them. Instead of developing and shaping the growth of Fort Lauderdale to take advantage of its natural geography and climate, those features are plowed over or ignored in favor of building massive roads designed for automobiles. “In a country where you can get to the moon, God help you if you want to cross the street” write Engler and Mugyenyi (p.4); anyone who has ever attempted to walk across a busy highway, even at a marked, lit crosswalk, understands this sentiment.

While the difficulty that pedestrians face in crossing busy roads is clearly notable, it is only one way in which the prominence of the automobile undermines personal autonomy. The advent of the automobile in the 20^th century was one of the factors that have defined the growth of the entire nation. As cities grew crowded, millions of people flocked to the newly-created suburbs, often commuting back to the cities for work. As commutes grew longer, millions of Americans found themselves (and still find themselves) spending hours and hours each day trapped in the confines of their automobiles. Every moment spent stuck in rush hour traffic is a moment that cannot be spent on something else. This eats into productivity, leisure time, time with family, and other possible ways of spending time. The automobile is often viewed as a symbol of personal freedom, but for many people the reality is much different. Faced with few other options, it is often all but impossible to escape the restrictions of having to drive to get to work, making the driver the slave to the automobile instead of the other way around. Even where “meager public transportation exists”(p.5), posit the authors, it usually requires the use of an automobile to access the entrance and egress points of such public options. It is not just the autonomy of non-drivers which is affected by automobiles; those who drive routinely are hemmed in by cars just as completely as those who do not.

Drilling deeper into the opportunity costs and practical costs of driving, Engler and Mugyenyi examine the expenses involved in operating and maintaining an automobile. According to a statistic cited by the authors, it costs an average of $8,400 per year (as of 2010) to own and operate an automobile (p.7). The total costs include expenses related to loan payments, automobile insurance, gas, repairs and other so-called “automobills” (p.7) often make up a significant portion of the average household budget. Not surprisingly, the percentage of such budgets spent on cars rises in inverse proportion to the availability of public transit and pedestrian access. According to Angler and Mugyenyi, residents in New York, San Francisco, and other “more walkable, public transit friendly cities” (p.7) spend less on transportation costs than their counterparts in less pedestrian-friendly cities. Just as commuters devote significant amounts of time to sitting behind the wheel on their way to and from work, they also spend significant amounts of time at work earning the money to pay for the costs of car ownership. As these costs in time and money begin to add up, it becomes increasingly difficult to argue that the symbiotic relationship between Homo Automotivis and the automobile is one that promotes personal autonomy and freedom of choice.

Automobiles do not just impinge on the individual autonomy of pedestrians and drivers; they also impinge on the autonomy of entire sectors of society. Much of the economic growth of the mid- to late-20^th century and early 21^st century was built on the sprawling development of suburbs and exurbs outside of cities across America. Those that could afford to do so often fled the cities to live in these suburbs, leaving those who could not afford it behind. Without the means to own a car, millions of people are left with few options or choices for employment; if a job cannot be reached except by driving, then it is out of reach for those that do not drive. This is true both for those trapped in cities without the means to leave and for those who find themselves trapped in the suburbs. These conditions also have social costs, as people are often more isolated from each other in regions where cars are predominant. As Engler and Mugyenyi ask, “what good is all this motion…if you don’t interact with anyone on the way or if there’s no longer anywhere interesting to go?” (p.9). Whether you are one of the people who depend on cars every day, or one of the people who are shut out from the world of automobiles, virtually every aspect of your daily life is determined by the automobile.

One of the key points made by Engler and Mugyenyi is that the effects of the automobile on society are so widespread, and permeate so many aspects of everyday life, that we often fail to notice them. These conditions are simply accepted as a natural part of life, despite the fact that they are so often in conflict with the well-being of human beings. While doctors warn patients every day about then need for exercise, for example, the world of the automobile is designed to limit the options for exercise. As the authors explain, “sprawl and the suburban landscape are built to serve the needs of Homo Automovitis, with sidewalks non-existent of disconnected, crosswalks poorly marked or absent, and the velocity and volume of vehicular traffic overwhelming” (p.31). Even in the free time individuals have left after devoting the necessary time to driving and car ownership, the available options for walking, biking, or other forms of exercise are hemmed in by the automobile. After a long day of commuting, working, and commuting again it is often easier to sit in front of the television than it is to leave the house to exercise (or to do much of anything else). With this in mind, the automobile does not just limit personal autonomy for the time people spend in cars, or the time people spend working to pay for cars; it also limits personal autonomy in what is left of leisure time.

There is an unmistakable irony in this relationship between people and automobiles: according to Engler and Mugyenyi, “estimates place average automobile speeds at five miles an hour” (p.8). This figure is calculated by combining the time involved in car ownership from the point of purchase through the time spent paying for and driving it. Seen from this perspective, driving is no faster than walking, while the time spent on driving is, as noted previously, time not spent on other activities. The closer one looks at the automobile and its effects on people and society, the clearer it becomes that the symbolic freedom it represents is just an illusion. The reality is that the automobile affects everyone, including those who drive and those who do not. In “Stop Signs,” Engler and Mugyenyi effectively argue that it is the automobile, rather than the driver, that has the most freedom.

Reference

Engler, Y., & Mugyenyi, B. (2011). Stop Signs.. Fernwood Publishing Company, Limited.