Oct 29, 20243 min read

The Bittersweet Goodbye: The Emotional Attachment to Our First Cars

Think back to your first car…how does it make you feel? Maybe you can remember the smell of it or a little flaw that made it unique. Sure, it’s a sentient object, but cars have personalities that we discover as their owners. It’s like a relationship you develop over time. You learn how the car likes to be driven; you find things you love and hate about it. Ultimately, you grow attached to it. That’s what makes it so hard to see it go when you finally decide to upgrade.

I’ve had my car since I was 17. It’s a 14-plate Seat Ibiza in white, with a perfect set of colour contrasting grey alloys to match. When I collected it from the showroom in Chesterfield, I didn’t even have my full driver’s license. We insured it under my own name (learner’s insurance) and bought a set of ‘L’ plates so I could be the one to drive it home. My nan sat next to me with my Mum following us behind. The smile never left my face until I got it home.

I passed my test about three weeks later. My instructor dropped me back home afterwards; it was a little sad to say goodbye, as I’d spent many hours a week with him over the previous few months, and I was now unlikely to ever see him again. He gave me some final pointers and wished me luck for driving on the open roads by myself. I rushed inside, quickly insured the car and that was it—I was straight out on my own. I think I must’ve visited every single family member that day, celebrating my newfound independence.

Over the years, I began to learn about my car’s personality. Like how it pulled in second gear, how I could get it slightly off the ground on local country roads and how it hated to be driven quickly through city centres and would guzzle fuel in the process. All these gave me such an attachment to the car I’ve owned for nearly five years.

Back when I was refereeing, that car took me everywhere, including the finals I was in charge of. I’ve parked it in the match officials’ car park of some of the huge stadiums I’ve been lucky to run the line at.

Then there’s the emotional memories. I’ve laughed in that car, blown my fuse in that car and cried in it too. I’ve sat there bricking myself waiting to hear results of exams, tests and scans. I’ve celebrated, thinking Rotherham had avoided relegation on the final day, only to find out Derby had scored and we were now going down. That little car has been a part of my life almost every day for the last five years. There’s no wonder there’s such an attachment there. Being the first in my school year to pass my test, most people in my village see the car and know it’s me that’s out and about.

Selling it was such a weird feeling. Reminiscing about all the memories in the car made me quite emotional, I’m not afraid to admit it. Yet it was also somewhat exciting, knowing that I was about to pick up a beautiful new car that I’m sure will help me create similar memories. It was a sad feeling that occurred to me moving out of my first-year university halls. An emotional time!

I can only assume the feeling is the same when you’re a fully-fledged adult. At 21, I don’t see myself as that. Moving house comes with poignant emotions and I’d imagine changing your car also carries such feelings (unless you’re someone who swaps their motor every year, perhaps). Maybe it’s slightly different when it’s not your first car, and it likely differs from individual to individual. I’ve got friends my age who’ve already had five cars, because they can’t help writing them off. I guess they probably haven’t felt the same emotions as I’m feeling, simply because they haven’t spent as much time with their cars.

Not knowing who is having the car next is also disappointing. I’d like to think it will be well looked after but being a ten-year-old machine with high mileage, I can’t imagine it will be. There’s not a dent or scratch to be found on it, and the seats still look like new. Whomever purchases it is getting a fantastic little car. Do I hope I get this same attachment to my new motor? I think I will, simply due to how much time I spend in my car. They’re fantastic memories, though, and I hope reading this has brought back some memories for you, too.

TikTok ban: An Act of Market Control, Not Freedom

All Articles

15 January 2025

Connor Banks

Want your article or story on our site? Contact us here

The Supreme Court of the United States met on Friday the 10th of January to discuss the imminent TikTok ban in the United States, and it's looking like the Supreme Court is going to uphold the ban. This means that TikTok will have to be sold off to an American company or be banned from America.

Facebook and Tiktok fighting each other. Felt design

The United States has long prided itself on being a champion of innovation and free-market competition. Yet, the recent push to ban TikTok exposes a different reality. While the ban is often framed as a measure to protect American "freedoms," closer scrutiny reveals that the motivations behind it are less about safeguarding national security or personal liberty and more about protecting the dominance of American tech giants who have failed to create a competing product.

The National Security Argument: A Convenient Scapegoat

The primary justification for the TikTok ban centres on national security concerns. Critics argue that TikTok’s ownership by a Chinese company poses risks of data misuse or surveillance by the Chinese government. While these concerns warrant investigation, the evidence presented so far has been largely speculative. Moreover, TikTok has taken significant steps to address these concerns, such as pledging to store U.S. user data domestically and offering unprecedented transparency in its operations.

In contrast, American tech companies, including Facebook and Google, have faced numerous scandals over data breaches and misuse, yet these incidents rarely spark discussions of bans. This double standard suggests that the TikTok ban isn’t truly about protecting users’ data but about something far more self-serving: market control.

A Failure to Innovate: American Companies’ Struggle to Compete

TikTok’s meteoric rise exposed a glaring weakness in American tech innovation. Despite their immense resources and influence, companies like Meta (formerly Facebook), Google, and Snapchat have failed to develop a platform that resonates with younger audiences in the same way TikTok does. Meta’s Instagram Reels and YouTube Shorts, both designed to mimic TikTok’s short-form video format, have not captured the same cultural zeitgeist or user engagement.

Rather than innovating, these companies have leaned heavily on their lobbying power to stifle competition. The push to ban TikTok can be seen as an attempt to remove a superior competitor from the market, allowing American platforms to reclaim dominance without addressing their own shortcomings. This approach not only stifles competition but also sets a dangerous precedent for using regulatory measures to quash innovative foreign products rather than improving domestic ones.

The Hypocrisy of “Freedom”

American lawmakers have framed the TikTok ban as a measure to protect citizens' freedoms, yet the ban itself directly contradicts the principles of choice and access that underpin those freedoms. TikTok’s success is driven by millions of Americans who have chosen to use the app, finding value in its unique algorithm, diverse content, and engaging user experience. Restricting access to the platform undermines these users’ autonomy, suggesting that their freedoms are secondary to corporate interests.

Furthermore, the United States’ tech landscape is already dominated by monopolies. Companies like Meta, Google, and Amazon control vast swaths of the internet, often using their market power to squash smaller competitors. The TikTok ban does not address this monopolistic behaviour; instead, it reinforces it by eliminating a rare instance of genuine competition in the social media space.

A Global Perspective: The Irony of “Protection”

The ban also highlights a broader irony. For years, American tech companies have championed global free markets, often entering foreign countries and out-competing local businesses. Yet when faced with competition from a foreign company on their own turf, the response has been to cry foul rather than adapt.

This hypocrisy weakens America’s global standing as a proponent of innovation and fair competition. Instead of banning TikTok, the United States could use this moment to examine why its own companies failed to create a comparable product and what can be done to foster domestic innovation.

The Real Solution: Compete, Don’t Constrain

If the goal is to protect American freedoms and ensure data security, a TikTok ban is a shortsighted solution. Instead, lawmakers should focus on regulating data privacy across all platforms, domestic and foreign, to ensure robust protections for users. Simultaneously, the tech industry should be incentivised to innovate rather than rely on protectionist policies.

TikTok’s popularity is a testament to its ability to connect with users in ways that American platforms have failed to replicate. Banning the app does not solve this problem; it simply papers over it. To truly champion freedom, the United States must allow competition to flourish, even when it means facing uncomfortable truths about its own shortcomings.

The push to ban TikTok is less about protecting American freedoms and more about protecting American monopolies. Framed as a national security issue, the campaign against TikTok is ultimately an admission that American tech giants have failed to keep up with their global counterparts. If the U.S. truly values innovation and freedom, it must resist the urge to eliminate competition through regulation and instead focus on fostering a market where the best product, not the most powerful company, wins.