The pandemic has forced many of us to reevaluate the way we live, work, and move around our cities. One concept that has gained traction throughout this pandemic is the idea of the "15-minute city" – a city where residents have access to everything they need within a 15-minute walk or bike ride. While they want the world to believe is a good idea, WE KNOW. We see the Pros and Cons of China's Early Experiments on Movement Control, for what it is.
First off, the 15-minute city is not a new concept. It has been around since the 1970s when a French architect, Carlos Moreno, coined the term. However, the pandemic has given it newfound popularity as cities rethink their approaches to transportation and urban planning. While it's true that having everything you need within a 15-minute radius can be convenient, it's not necessarily efficient. It assumes that all your needs are within close proximity, which is often not the case. China's experiments on movement control have caused quite a stir in the international community. While some laud these efforts as a way to enhance human mobility, others criticize them as an example of governmental overreach. Though the topic is contentious, one thing is clear: the way we move is changing. the Plandemic taught us that.
The push for cities across the world to adopt the idea of 15-minute cities is clear. This idea has become extremely popular in recent years, with many cities and governments putting the idea at the center of urban planning. While the idea of creating a more sustainable and accessible city is undoubtedly for those who have good intentions, those who are awake know how these cities will infringe on basic human rights, specifically the right to freedom of movement.
Freedom of movement is a fundamental human right. It is enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and is essential for a healthy and functioning society. The right to move freely is not only important for access to basic services and amenities, but it also allows individuals to access education, employment, and social connections that contribute to their well-being.
However, the concept of 15-minute cities threatens this fundamental right. These control centers will create a system of class segregation, where those who can afford to live in the 15 minute zones have better access to resources and opportunities than those who cannot.
The 15-minute city concept, which eliminates long commutes and promotes working from home, seems like a no-brainer. However, the issue of freedom of choice arises when local governments enforce restrictions to make it work. This can include limiting when people can drive their cars and monitoring citizen movement. As pointed out by Jo Nova in his article " The green agenda program is taking inspiration from the tyrannical days of COVID lockdowns. The plans are coercive as strict rules will be placed on car journeys. It’s the social credit scheme that starts with your car and works like anti-frequent-flyer points."
In Oxford, UK, authorities faced backlash when they introduced traffic filters and license plate readers to fine non-residents entering central areas during high-traffic periods. While residents received some leniency, the restrictions sparked protests with 2,000 demonstrators taking to the streets and five arrests made. These limits may only apply to regular citizens, while members of higher status may have special privileges. It begs the question - are we really free to make our own choices in a 15-minute city?
Discover the new "pedestrian and climate change friendly" movement of 15-minute cities. Although labeled by some as a mere traffic reduction scheme, this initiative is generating massive media campaigns against those who oppose it. Don't let your concerns be dismissed as "far-right conspiracy theories." European cities like Copenhagen, Amsterdam, and Oslo are already leading the way, with Detroit, Portland, and Ottawa following suit. However, we must remain aware of the dangers of limiting travel and what such restrictions could mean for our freedom. It's time to take a closer look at the road we're paving and where it could lead.
The 15-minute cities will lead to an increase in surveillance and monitoring of citizens. In order to effectively manage these neighborhoods, governments and city planners will likely require extensive data on the movements and behaviors of individuals, potentially violating privacy rights. The implementation of this idea may also lead to the creation of exclusive gated communities, further limiting access to public spaces and resources.
Additionally, the focus on 15 minute cities may put undue pressure on local businesses to provide all necessary amenities within a 15 minute radius. This could lead to a decrease in economic diversity, potentially limiting employment opportunities and creating further inequalities within society.
In conclusion, while the concept of 15 minute cities may seem appealing to many, it is important to consider the potential threats to basic human rights, particularly the right to freedom of movement. It is crucial to balance the need for local amenities with economic diversity and affordability for all individuals. We see the destructive media campaign that is already underway to promote the creation of "planet-saving" communities, even if it violates individual liberties and personal boundaries. Just do a quick search on google to see how the 15-minute cities are touted as the solution for both life and health for humans and mother earth alike. All who oppose the idea are being unfairly labeled as "far-right conspiracy theorists," "paranoid," and "fringe." Soon, social media platforms may censor any discourse that goes against the proposed 15-minute cities, branding it as "violating community standards." The reality is that limiting travel has always been a hallmark of communism, and implementing this idea will have dire consequences. Let us not be fooled by the good-hearted intentions; we know exactly where this road will lead us.