infinitesimally

That word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Cars actually line up very well with many aspects of right-wing ideology.

Cars work great for the individual, but they severely harm the collective. They demand society be built around them entirely, they’re very damaging to everyone not in a car, but at the same time society cannot handle everyone being in a car because of air quality, noise pollution, environmental damage and sheer lack of space. If the road is full of cyclists, the one person inside a car is safer than the cyclists are, but every cyclist is less safe because of the single person driving a car.

The capitalist doesn’t see anything wrong with this, because if the poors don’t have a car and get fucked by society, who cares? They’re fine with solutions that benefit the few at the cost of the many, it’s their whole thing. They don’t want a solution that works for everyone, they want one that works for them, and if that solution elevates them above the poor? Even better!

Right wing individualism // Less likely to kill someone

Pick one.

This is sort of a negative liberty vs positive liberty situation in some ways.

But anyway, in the left image: The state collected taxes to build subsidies for oil & automobile companies. Later, the state can’t afford to maintain and expand the subsidies to meet demand with taxation alone, so the quality of service degrades significantly - in part due to other outstanding liabilities like a neocolonial empire in support of other capital interests - but mostly because of the sprawl. It therefore has to assume large deficits to finance the maintenance alone, which is unsustainable in the global liberal market where money is real. Nothing is left over to pay for any long term initiatives to improve anything else.

In the right image, the state collected taxes and built (at least in this particular street) sustainable infrastructure that isn’t subjected to the stresses of automobile traffic.

There’s nothing free market about either one, it’s just a difference in priorities for how public money was utilized… To subsidize particular industries (whether the individuals involved in planning/building had any awareness of that or not) or to be sustainable.