Astroturfing: Not Just Bikes

Letters from O'Brien #39

Dear Mr Smith,

Last year I mentioned how astroturfing has become one of the primary methods of manipulating the perception of the public online. The example given was the relentless astroturfing campaigns which destroyed public discourse on Reddit. However, it is by no means limited to forums and such. YouTube appears to have its fair share of astroturfed content as well, and the more one becomes aware of the ideological underpinnings of what is being pushed, the more obvious these astroturfed channels become.

One such channel I recently became aware of is ‘NotJustBikes’, supposedly run by a single individual who is interested in urban planning. This is unlikely.

MANIPULATED

The channel appeared out of nowhere in 2019. According to the channel creator himself, ‘Not Just Bikes’ was created to share his experiences in the Netherlands, in which urban planning has resulted in infrastructure which reflects the ‘smart-city’ design pushed by leftist in the United States and also tied to ideas being implemented in Canada. Despite its vague (and rather uninteresting) premise and aim, the channel grew rapidly, however its growth does not seem to parallel any legitimate trend or viral idea which the channel creator has published. Not only that, but there is little information online regarding the channel creator (‘Jason Slaughter’) beyond supposedly working as a project management executive for ‘tech startups’, and ‘moving 29 times’ throughout the world. This evidently suggests some sort of backing, although it is not clear as to where such backing would have come from.

The channel now sits at over a million subscribers, however the published videos fail to hold a consistent number of viewers. This could be explained away, but it does seem inconsistent with what basically amounts to uninteresting commentary on the ‘evils of capitalism’.

What immediately stood out to me when first viewing the channel was the comments section. The comments are almost certainly artificially mentored and censored to paint a particular picture. However, if you spent enough time on YouTube as I have, you tend to know what to look for, and how to see through such manipulation. Firstly, the comments section on every Not Just Bikes video is entirely positive and seems strangely in line with whatever the subject matter of the video is. Secondly, the few dozen comments often have thousands of likes, which only happens when videos which have gone viral (many millions of views). Case in point; a recent video uploaded by Not Just Bikes called “These stupid trucks are literally killing us”. Every comment appears manipulated, while any opinion that disagrees seems to have been scrubbed. Thirdly, despite many of these comments having thousands of likes, most of them have ZERO replies, and those that do basically only have a few. Of these few (which often only have a dozen or so responses), almost every response comment in the chain has hundreds of likes. This never happens on an organic video, since there is fluctuation in opinion, leading to certain commenters having many likes, and others having few.

This strange astroturfed image is present on all Not Just Bikes social media accounts. On Twitter, for example, his account comes in at a little under 100,000 followers, yet his tweets receive little to no serious interaction. His ‘livestreams’ channel is equally quiet. His Reddit page clocks in at almost the exact same number of followers as his Twitter account, with an equally strange range of community interactions and conversations. Many are undoubtably real people, albeit ideologues (many either joke about or admit to being actual Communists), while the rest seem to be conveniently dull or blindly supportive comments from obscure accounts.

NO MORE CARS

The biggest push from the channel appears to be against the use of cars. This is something which is discussed in many of his videos. The general narrative is all too predictable; cars use fossil fuels, fossil fuels are apparently bad, cars use roads rather than sidewalks, cars are unhealthy, cars are loud, and other such idiocies.

As with most western socialists post-Herbert Marcuse, the primary attack seems to be aimed at things which work, while the primary goal seems to be to replace working systems with systems which are prone to failure. This is why nuclear power is deliberately ignored - since it wouldn’t lead to the collapse of western civilisation. What needs to be understood is that the goal is not to better society. It is to deliberately destroy it. If an affordable, powerful, eco-friendly solution to energy were suddenly discovered, it would also be ignored, because it works. Herbert Marcuse made this obvious when he said that the goal of Critical Theory (neo-Marxism) is to uproot and completely overturn civilisation, until nothing remains. This is his explicit goal, and his ideas lay the groundwork for many modern socialists.

As the name suggests, Not Just Bikes focuses on replacing conventional cities and towns with ‘walkable cities’. That is, cities which ban or limit car use and redesign streets for people to walk or bike everywhere. For long term travel, the car alternative will supposedly be rail. This - unsurprisingly - aligns with the goals of many ‘absolute zero carbon’ proposals, which hold that the future of travel will be rail, not by car or plane.

This particularly strong anti-car sentiment is held by what appears to be real people who watch his videos. This is evidenced in the comments of his various social media accounts. In many comments, users call for the destruction or vandalism of vehicles - particularly SUVs - to bring about ‘radical change’.

PLANNED SOCIETIES

One recent video was dedicated entirely to the idea of raising kids in what basically amounts to a ‘smart city’, with the host initially stating that he would never wish to raise children in suburbia. Well, where would he prefer to raise them? In the country, with space? On a farm? No. Instead the host declares that the best place to raise children is within a tightly packed cityscape environment. The justifications for this are poor, and points to another motive for this type of content being produced.

Not Just Bikes also runs a podcast titled ‘The Urban Agenda’. The podcast is strange to say the least, but luckily its existence allows us to discern its real agenda. Within the podcast, the host (who also hosts Not Just Bikes) spends a large portion of the time criticising and making fun of who he calls ‘Conspiracy Theorists’. These apparent conspiracy theorists include people who do not wish to take part in planned cities or societies (which the channel openly advocates for), those who believe that 15-minute cities are being planned and implemented (despite the channel calling for this), those who believe that economic and social decisions should not be given over to a centralised state (the channel essentially calls on the state to enforce these agendas - because no individual or organisation would go along without coercion), and seems to promote a negative view of those who choose to live in the country rather than the city. The podcast speaks for itself, coming across as a profoundly artificial in its presentation, and rather revealing thanks to the poor self-awareness of the host. 

REALITY

Before continuing on the astroturfing path, it is worth mentioning why the ideas promoted on the channel are not beneficial to anyone and will likely be a net-negative if implemented.

Firstly, planned societies usually fail, and they fail because the ‘society’ as a whole never unanimously asked for their way of life to be altered in order to adhere to a set of newly implemented rules and regulations. Urban planning is an example of this; in the perfect world it would make sense, since an entire city (for example) could be designed such that everything on the micro and macro scale is integrated properly, and efficiently. However urban planning on the large scale is uncommon, and when it does occur it is not without its drawbacks. This is because cities and urban environments usually develop naturally (that is, they ‘evolve’) as economies grow within them, resulting in naturally forming markets which draw in new individuals. In contrast, advocates of large-scale social planning often believe that economies can be ‘created’ (that is, ‘economic creationism’, in contrast to ‘economic evolutionism’). The problem is, a planned city cannot predict what markets will emerge within it, nor where the businesses it has considered should be placed for best efficiency. Twenty people in a board room cannot predict these things; only individuals can when the market is left to figure itself out.

The reality of urban planning can be seen wherever urban planning is implemented; either rules and regulations have to be set up in order to limit how far the urban environment can shift (thus upholding the planned design) which results in market inefficiencies which could easily be solved if people were left to figure it out themselves, OR the urban environments lose their original planned design, as businesses and shops attempt to use the planned environment in order to fill market demands within a given area, but this can also result in some market inefficiencies. For example, a planned city may include large office spaces, but the market demands restaurants and cafes in said region. The office space will (if the authorities allow it) be converted into makeshift restaurants and cafes to fill this need. Likewise, there may be ‘shopping areas’ specifically for retailers, when most people (and thus the market) does not wish for a clothing retailer, but a supermarket. Thus, changes must come about to accommodate what the market requires, or else inefficiencies and shortcoming will emerge. The Soviet Union perfectly exemplified this; since everything was centrally planned, there was no price mechanic, and thus no way of gauging demand in any given area at any given time, thus resulting in supply shortages or excesses which did not match any actual desire from the market.

But even beyond that, there are simpler things to consider. The vast majority of people don’t want to give up their cars, give up roads, and adopt bicycles. This is not the will of the people. It is the will of a small minority, many of whom are likely driven by resentful motives. It only comes about from top-down administrative power. Many within this movement openly admit this and call for the government to take away individual liberties.

Not Just Bikes ironically highlights the evident contradiction between the desires of the working class, and the desire of those in power to force change upon society. If the population wished for any of the things the channel is promoting, then both the individual and the free market would have pivoted towards that move of their own accord. But the vast majority do not want of this. Hence, the state is called on - as per usual - to enforce these ideas upon the masses. Individuals are coerced through inconvenience or policies to adopt new changes, while the free market is held hostage to state-affiliated programs such as ESG ranking to move the market against its natural progression. All of this results in a worsened society.

ASTROTURFED?

At this point it seems obvious that there are several large YouTube channels are the by-products of astroturfing campaigns, particularly those which dive into the sciences or - in this case - commentary on urban planning and sustainability. From the out of touch presentation to the artificial responses and community interaction, many content creators seem to be either bought out or artificially created to sway public opinion.

In the case of Not Just Bikes, it seems rather obvious that the channel creator is not producing content purely of his own accord. The subtleties in the presentation of the channel, the content, the user interactions, and the general direction the content pushes the audience in alludes to there being a deeper reason behind its existence. It seems more than plausible that the channel could be funded by larger think tanks, much in the same way that other hyper-inorganic channels such as ‘Veritasium’ are. Not Just Bikes - from YouTube to TikTok - relentlessly pushes a clear agenda, yet why an individual would be so motivated, and do so much of his own accord to what basically amounts to propaganda for government-backed city-planning is unclear. There must be something else at play regarding this project.

It is possible that the project is backed by the Canadian government. I say this only because a large portion of the content uploaded to YouTube and TikTok is simultaneously both critical of the ‘American Idea’ (a free market society in which individuals can purchase as they wish), and in support of the Canadian governments 15-minute city projects. This includes a heavy focus on Toronto and its urban planning projects.

What’s more, the general ‘community’ surrounding the Not Just Bikes channel speaks for itself; both on social media and in the TikTok and YouTube comment sections, most interactions (between real people, at least) follow the same trend. The majority seem to be ‘of the same mind’. That is, middle-upper class individuals who advocate for socialism and hate America. Going deeper, many of the interactions have the undertone of resentment, both towards the successful capitalist, and to life more broadly. This shouldn’t be surprising, since many neo-Marxist socialists seem to be possessed by the same spirit of hatred towards life and existence, seeking subconsciously (or in some cases consciously) to make life worse for everyone, perhaps as some sort of divine vengeance against God.

There is evidently something to be said about cityscapes: the problems with them, and ways in which they can improve. However, the methods suggested would only come into practice through state intervention. They don’t align with the desires of the individual, society, or the market. As such, they must be forced onto all of them, against the will of the majority. This is not something anyone should be advocating for.

Sincerely yours,

O’Brien