Between a pedestrian who walks erect and a driver sitting in an automobile, a bicycle is a kind of middle class. It represents a kind of intermediary movement, a middle ground between full muscular exertion of the body and the refined activity of one who uses an engine. A bicycle moves as a result of its rider's muscle power, but it also deploys modern technology in the form of gears. Also, in a temporal sense, a bike stands in the middle - separating an early morning, or perhaps late evening, ride from the rest of the day's activities.

A bike is also a type of middle class in that it requires perpetual motion. It moves forward as a result of the power of inertia, but a cessation of pedaling means that the whole cycle mechanism, and its rider, will eventually be brought to a halt. The same holds true with the middle class: If it stops working, the entire socioeconomic framework it supports will come to a screeching halt.

Why is this relevant? Because this weekend cyclists were again killed on the road. And the same old responses were heard, calling for such bike riding to be banned by law. Such responses cast blame on the riders for accidents in which they are involved.

Israel's society is convulsed these days. Many point to the well-being of the middle class as the parameter that must be improved if a reasonable way of life is to be forged in the country. This is a vision in which the strong will not destroy the weak - and also is a vision in search of a means of implementation. Indeed, it seems that the value of enjoying a reasonable standard of life rests upon concepts related to a middle ground - to the middle class, to moderate economic policy, and so on.

The key word is the "middle," the place between extremes. Finding such a place involves a blessing - and a danger. The blessing involves the successful ability to bridge between phenomena, situations and people. The danger is the temptation to remain on the fence, without making commitments to anything on either side.

Imagine a situation in which someone takes seriously the array of proposals banning the use of bicycles on Israeli roads. Implementation of such suggestions would mean that any movement on a roadway in the country that is not achieved within the confines of a vehicle's metal frame would be in effect banned. Compliance would mean the eradication of a middle ground. Gone would be a situation in which a slow-moving, unprotected traveler could cycle by on the shoulders of the roads. In the new situation, the strong would wrest control of the nation's thoroughfares.

Our discussion up to now has pertained to symbolic matters, but we can also expound on the question of who the people are who actually ride what we call bicycles. These are people who take the middle ground. Looking only at the minority of cyclists who are equipped with incredibly expensive equipment and have considerable economic resources, would be facile. Indeed, it is worth remembering that the majority of riders in Israel use their bikes as an actual means of transportation. Sometimes this is a result of a lack of money; in other cases, the problem is the lack of an adequate public transport system.

A ban on bike riding would not only harm something that symbolizes the middle ground; it would also create a dichotomy between the strong and the weak, the rich and the poor, those who have the resources to remain mobile and those who are grounded where they are. It is worth examining whether there is a connection between, on the one hand, the sources of inspiration (particularly in Western Europe ) for current calls for social justice and, on the other hand, the degree of physical mobility of, and available means of transportation for citizens in these countries.

Dr. Asaf Hazani wrote his doctorate on bicyclists.