>>2044939
Forgot the picture like a dummy

>>2044938
Well you could lower speeds to 30Km/h but I think that comes with higher infeasability and probably is still less safe than just having a bike path like picrel
I think I understand where you're coming from and the lack of a full spectrum approach to transportation and urban planning as well as bending lives and liberties to appease the sloth and expediency of car drivers is shit, but I don't think properly built bike paths and bike infrastructure that has proper inhibitors and design that deconflicts traffic modes is part of that cancerous motorism mindset.
I think it's a smooth transition between these concepts in reality
For example picrel is perhaps the "undue privilege for motorist" version of bike infrastructure
But if the bike/pedestrian path were raised like is often done in the Netherlands and other countries that plan urban infra competently so as to form a speed bump that physically forces the driver to slow down lest he pay a few grand for the underbody damage it is slightly more just in the sense of not sacrificing peoples health and lives for seconds of convenience anymore at all like before