This is naive. In the first place, the automobile was the solution to a problem many people didn't even know they had. In some cases, demand had to be stimulated by undermining what was previously a satisfactory status quo.
Second, the spread of the automobile was enabled by massive government spending on highways and roads.(and probably oil subsidies too.)
In urban areas, living "organic" neighborhoods were bulldozed to pave the way for rootless commuters and interstate commerce. Those neighborhoods were generally chosen because they had the least politically organized communities--in other words, they were people not just least likely to resist governmental action against their interests, but also the least likely to agitate for government action in their interests. The result of such action was, in effect though perhaps not in intention, ethnic cleansing.
I find it sad that some libertarians are pushing for toll roads, when the road system itself is often the result of raw governmental power. Their criticisms do not go deep enough.
People didn't know that they had to travel from Point A to Point B, sometimes at high speed and/or with heavy cargoes?
In some cases, demand had to be stimulated by undermining what was previously a satisfactory status quo.
This is a standard ultra-left denunciation of Eeeeevil Corporations, and (especially in combination with the previous comment) drips with contempt for the intelligence of ordinary people.
Second, the spread of the automobile was enabled by massive government spending on highways and roads.(and probably oil subsidies too.)
To the extent that this is a problem, it is not a fault of the automobile per se, any more than (for example) agricultural subsidies are a fault of food per se.
In urban areas, living "organic" neighborhoods were bulldozed to pave the way for rootless commuters and interstate commerce.
This is another bit of contempt for the masses who obstinately refuse to live as you would prefer them to live.