UK vs. Xg: Is it wrong for cyclists to cycle on pavements?

Pavement cyclists targeted by police in Canton, Cardiff.

Police have begun a "zero tolerance" crackdown on cyclists using pavements in parts of Cardiff.
But transport campaign group Sustrans Cymru says Cardiff is "significantly worse" than many cities for bikes, and says cyclists often find roads hostile.

The seven-week operation, which will run one day a week in Canton until 31 August, could see cyclists receive £30 fixed penalty notices if caught.

South Wales Police say they share local concerns about potential injuries.

It is an offence under the Highways Act to ride on a pavement in the UK.

- bbc

Cycling in the UK

What ought to precede such 'crackdowns' is the building of cycling paths, or at least, the widening of roads. 

Half the time, I cycle on pavements here in Harlow, but that's because the roads in quite a few places are really narrow.  That makes it difficult or dangerous for motorists to navigate around cyclists as they may knock into an oncoming vehicle on the opposite road if they try to navigate around the cyclist, or knock the cyclist if they don't. 

There is a great imbalance of power between a cyclist and a motorist, but this imbalance isn’t as pronounced in the relationship between a cyclist and a pedestrian. It is this factor that must determine the legality of pavement-cycling.It seems that many a road here is built for ye ole horse and cart and which wouldn't pose much of a problem for cyclists if the latter were to cycle on the roads due to the lesser speed of the former.  That is not the case when it comes to relationship between a bicycle and a car.  The latter is of far greater power, speed, and can  kill.  This, however, cannot be said of the relationship between a bicycle and a pedestrian as the power, size and weight of both isn’t as great.  You can’t crush a person wholly with a bicycle as opposed to a truck or a car can you. 

This is a typical case of roads not evolving with technology mate.  I don’t see why cyclists ought to be penalised because roads have not been upgraded to take into account the greater risk a car or a truck can pose a cyclist as opposed to a horse and cart.  There is a great imbalance of power between a cyclist and a motorist, but this imbalance isn’t as pronounced in the relationship between a cyclist and a pedestrian.  It is this factor that must determine the legality of pavement-cycling.

I do, however, have to give credit to many a British motorist whom are highly aware of and considerate toward the humble cyclist.  Many a time, I had motorists smile and thank me with a nod when i had given them way even when it was their right of way.  Many a time i had cars stop and let me pass even when it wasn’t my right of way.  Many a time I had cars stop for me at the traffic lights when i was on foot or a bicycle even when the lights were in their favour.  Once i had a whole 4-lane road traffic stop for me because i hadn’t realised that the lights had turned green in their favour....and i didn’t even hear one honk.  I suppose it complements the general attention paid to the underdog, the insignificant, minorities, etc, in society, and reinforces considerate and empathetic behaviour on the road.  Without that, the death toll amongst cyclists would most certainly be much higher.

Cycling in Xingapore

(Xingapore: ed has initiated the distinction between 'Singapore' and 'Xingapore' where the former represents a multicultural state appreciative of difference and the latter, one that doesn't, and which is the state of Singapore-today.  The name is derived from, '' that is purported to represent singapore, but which recognises and presents singapore as a chinese state, and which has been the case in all other arenas for the past couple of decades.)

Unlike the UK, Singapore has wide roads, and can supposedly be deemed as relatively safer for the cyclist.  However, where the UK has quite a large population of considerate drivers to whom the cyclist isn’t invisible, Singapore does not have as proportionately as large a population or a culture that promotes attention to the minority in all arenas.

In a once Malay country that is currently, by official promotion, abiding by the ancient Legalist-Confucian culture of China, it is to be expected that one doesn’t pay attention to anything or anyone that isn’t large, prominent, powerful, or part of the majority race.  In such a grossly self-centred state of affairs, cyclists, being ‘minorities’ in size, are in constant danger despite the size of the road being wide enough to accommodate both pedal and engine-powered vehicles.  And whilst there are quite a few cycling paths throughout the country in the UK, there are hardly any in Singapore except in locations where there aren’t any cars.  Ridiculous of course.

I had once stated, in an irate moment, after almost being knocked down by a car, for the fourth or fifth time in a few months, with the hallmark passion and intelligence of an Indian who didn’t underdevelop within the Legalist-Confucian state of affairs, “So what bloody choice am i being given here?!  To cycle safely on the pavement and risk a huge fine, or cycle on the roads and risk being run down by a chinaman because this MIC (made in china) system promotes and lauds self-absorption, opportunism and attention only to the big and powerful?!” 

where the UK has quite a large population of considerate drivers to whom the cyclist isn’t invisible, Singapore does not have as proportionately as large a population or a culture that promotes attention to the minority in all arenas.In some sense, these motorists can’t be blamed.  Self-absorption and attention only to the big, the popular, the majority, etc, has become an internalised condition in line with the Confucian principle of ‘self-regulation’  - where perspectival and morals are internalised within the people and no conscious effort has to be made to practice the ensuing behaviour. (all that this principle ensures is the smooth running of society and not necessarily that the society is running on the right morals.

For Confucians (one doesn’t have to be chinese to be a’s a cultural thing, not a race thing, unless an entire race identifies with it because they deem it to be ‘their culture’.) and Confucian states, the smooth running of something is a good in itself.  Their goal, for instance, would not be for the blacks in America-past to be emancipated from their slavery,  but for them to get used to it and underdevelop accordingly.  Hence, these motorists naturally do not see you because you are simply not big, and not a car.  In speaking to a group of Malay cyclists once, they told me that they often cycle in groups and have many lights on their persons, “So the cars can see us and avoid us.”  In other words, in a group, they look ‘big’, and hence, noticeable.

Many a time I had been the only one on the road, and I would see that a driver on a side-road about to turn onto the main road - which i’m on - only looking out for another car whilst being completely oblivious to me as he drives onto the main road and toward me.  I had, at such times, only saved myself by yelling at him with an, “Oi!....You ******* blind or what?! ******* assho*e!‘ and which causes him to notice me and stop.  There was another incident when a taxi driver pulling out of a parking slot was looking in my direction but didn’t seem to see me at all and was obviously just looking to see if there was any car on the road.  He still pulled out, and i knocked into the front of his car and fell off.  He got out immediately and apologised.  But he still got an, ‘What Sorry?!  You ******* blind or what?!  Only can see car is it?!”  I had to restrain myself as i was close to taking out my helmet and slapping his face with it as I couldn’t believe that I almost ended up under his wheels simply because he was comfortable paying attention to the big, majority, and popular in his daily life.  Being economically disadvantaged by this attitude, being stopped at the customs all the time by racist and small-minded malay and chinese policemen, etc, etc, was bad enough.  I didn't think that I had to lose my limb or life because it as well. 

You see, racism, economic opportunism, and not paying attention to the small on the road all share the generic tendency of not bothering about difference, and the relatively insignificant.  When you promote one, the effects are generally resonate across the board.  (Thereafter i built my own bikelight that would be sure to catch the attention of anyone in its line-of-throw - and far cheaper and brighter than most overpriced bike lights out there.) 

So, in such a typically Confucian state of affairs where one lives under the tyranny of the majority, where people are cognizant only of the prominent and the popular in all arenas, would it be wrong to compensate for such an evil by cycling on the pavement?

What ought to be done is to either bring about a more humane and empathetic society - in which case, the government will not be able to control and profit from the people as much as they have via the officially stated Sino-Nazi policy of keeping a racial balance ‘in favour of the chinese’ and religiously promoting chinese culture - or to build cycling paths throughout the country. 

I dare say that the latter will not be, or not be for a long time to come, as people might opt to cycle to work or for leisure instead of driving as that would mean the government will not be able to extort as much money from the people via charges levied for the simple on-paper right to own a car (£20-£40 thousand pounds) or the toll charges that have to be paid at various points throughout this little pimple of a nation - in a purported effort to keep the population of cars down.



  1. I certainly enjoy my ride in the UK. Most motorists in the UK are highly aware of and considerate toward the cyclists. Like you, I had cars stop and let me pass even when it wasn’t my right of way. Cycling in the UK is a wonderful and pleasant experience, where one can enjoy the cycling journey whereas in xg, one can only focus on getting from point A to point B safely.

    Bicycles are unwelcome in xg (agree and support your distinction between sg and xg). I am terrified to cycle on the road in xg. It makes me feel like the most fragile thing on the road and I am treated as if I should not be on the road (it’s not my cycling skills, its the size of the bike vs the car). The car drivers just don’t see you and even if they do, they will honk at you to make sure you give way to them even when it’s my right of way.

    You should continue to ride on the pavement when you cycle in xg as it’s the only escape from the hostile road. I am not empathetic toward these motorists in xg. Though it is an “internalised condition in line with the Confucian principle of ‘self-regulation’, it is not condonable. It is precisely because of this “internalised condition” that the needs, opportunities and treatments of the minorities are being neglected to a large extent. The celebrations of chinese festivals, more chinese programs on telly, reductions of malay, indian foodstalls in coffeeshops,..etc.

  2. When I drive (which is in the USA, not XG), I always drive defensively and with consideration for other road users. When I see pedestrians on the road, or an animal, or anything out of the ordinary, like a cyclist, I would slow down instinctively and make room to avoid him/her. This is basic empathy, reciprocity, consideration and basic respect for other human beings and other lifeforms. I notice that others here (most of them, anyway), drive similarly. It is quite the opposite in Xg, motorists try to run others (smaller or weaker than them, e.g. cyclists) over. So all I can say is that judging by the way people drive in xg, they lack basic human qualities such as compassion, empathy, kindness, respect, consideration and patience. I am sure as you say that their culture has caused them to develop along such lines. This said, I would never consider driving or cycling in xg, as the motorists are reckless, selfish and dangerous, and I would risk too much in doing so.


Post a Comment

The Inquisitive venture is a collaborative one. Let's collaborate.

Ad hominem is fine so long as it is accompanied with an argument, as opposed to being confused for an argument. In the latter case, deletion will follow.