6 ms·

> Frankly, the Luddites wanted to be able to feed their children, they didn’t want to be driven into poverty, and they thought those things were more important

> Frankly, the Luddites wanted to be able to feed their children, they didn’t want to be driven into poverty, and they thought those things were more important than the factory owners becoming wealthier and more powerful The effect of industrial revolution was not just factory owners being wealthier or more powerful. It raised the workers wages and increased living standards for everyone

TeMPOraL 8y ago
Over time, and over lots of fighting. It didn't look like it when it's your boss that started to suppress your wages thanks to a new machine. Yes, the industrial revolution enabled increased wages and living standards. But for them to actually happen, and trickle down to workers, people had to fight hard. The modern working standards are literally written in tears and blood of our forefathers.
- wiz21c 8y ago
  >>> people had to fight hard that's the unfortunate truth about "wealth redistribution" (aka "inequality"). it's quite logical : those who have much don't feel the need to give as much as those who feel the need to have more.
  - TeMPOraL 8y ago
    It wasn't really about wealth redistribution. It was about not exploiting people to the limits of possibility, and then discarding the hulks. The work conditions during early industrial revolution were inhumane.
- a1369209993 8y ago
  Technically, (somewhat) increased living standards are a inevitable consequence of significant production improvements in a not-completely-disfunctional economy. That doesn't really help in the short term though. Also: > literally written in tears and blood figuratively; tears and blood make shit writing materials.
  - BeetleB 8y ago
    You must have not gotten the memo about the word "literally" http://blog.nawaz.org/posts/2012/Aug/merriam-webster-is-rolling-in-his-grave-literally/ http://blog.nawaz.org/posts/2012/Aug/merriam-webster-is-roll...
    - a1369209993 8y ago
      Until you can provide a alternative word that only means "literally", "literally" means "literally", not "figuratively".
      - BeetleB 8y ago
        >Until you can provide a alternative word that only means "literally", "literally" means "literally", not "figuratively". You're welcome to use the word as you please. The majority of the English speaking world, however, disagrees with you. If you care about clarity and precision, "literally" is a word to avoid.
jacquesm 8y ago
Yes, but that is not something the Luddites could see from where they were standing and plenty of them did end up hungry. The problem with progress is that it does nothing whatsoever for those that are being displaced, and to tell them to 'have the long view' does not solve their immediate problems.
- digi_owl 8y ago
  Across time the vast majority of crime seems to originate with hunger and other desperate situations.
  - hinkley 8y ago
    As the saying goes: revolutions happen when the price of bread goes too high.
    - digi_owl 8y ago
      And something we witnessed during the Arab Spring.
      - triangleman 8y ago
        He's right: https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2011/jul/17/bread-food-arab-spring https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2011/jul/17/bread-f...
- michaelscott 8y ago
  Humans just don't live long enough to benefit as a generation when it comes to this kind of rapid and radical progress, which is sad. That said, I think the issue is largely one of mindset. Although we don't live very long, we are unusually adaptable, a feature which becomes lost in the comfort of an agreeable status quo. Unfortunately for the Luddites, it wasn't a feature that manifested again when that status quo was upended.
digi_owl 8y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enclosure https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enclosure
gaius 8y ago
It raised the workers wages and increased living standards for everyone Right, but the pitch goes something like this: "sometime after you and your family have starved to death, people you've never met will enjoy increased living standards, and they won't even remember you or your sacrifice, pretty neat huh?". Not very compelling, is it? Would you take that deal? Something like it is being offered to Workers in the trucking industry right now...
- stochastic_monk 8y ago
  And it's far from the only such industry. We need something like universal basic income, or one of two alternatives will happen: most people will suffer in droves, or they'll break out the metaphorical guillotine of our times. The people at the top of the economic foodchain are usually for too short-sighted to consider what will happen then.
- crispyporkbites 8y ago
  Our current working environment is quite different now though, for the Luddites the only major employers in the area would have been the factories, and mobility just wasn’t there (you had to live within walking distance of your employer for obvious reasons). A trucker can find another job, and it’s not like we are going to remove truckers overnight, if ever, self driving cars are always a couple of years away and there will be major regulatory and employment hurdles to overcome before those jobs are taken out. It’s not comparable to dropping a new machine into a factory.
twblalock 8y ago
This is an oversimplifying response to an article that brings some nuance into history of the period. Understanding history is not just about passing verdicts on the outcomes with the benefit of hindsight. It's about understanding the process of change, why it happened, and how people living at the time viewed the changes and reacted to them. An article like this sheds light on a lot of those topics, including people's beliefs about their economic rights at that time. It corrects common misconceptions about the Luddites. It demonstrates that the outcomes of the Industrial Revolution were not inevitable, and that people's understanding of what was going on at the time was very different than our understanding of it today. It opens the door to further research for people interested in the topic. It doesn't deserve a handwavy dismissal.
- rijoja 8y ago
  Which misconceptions? I read up until he even pulled the racism card and learned exactly nothing. Obviously they didn't destroy all technology a feat which would require a lot of technology.
nabla9 8y ago
If you define industrial revolution narrowly just as technological revolution and new industries, you are wrong. If you defined as a change in the whole society, you are right. Technological advances -> new industries -> social tensions and hard political battle -> social changes -> living standards increased for everyone.
Finnucane 8y ago
Everyone makes a living wage from their work?
coldtea 8y ago
>The effect of industrial revolution was not just factory owners being wealthier or more powerful. It raised the workers wages and increased living standards for everyone Which doesn't matter much when you and your family starves -- as their families did, and workers fucked over by globalization and automation do. One could shrug it off as "the cost of progress", but that's a luxury one has only when they are among those benefiting from it.

TeMPOraL 8y ago

Over time, and over lots of fighting. It didn't look like it when it's your boss that started to suppress your wages thanks to a new machine. Yes, the industrial revolution enabled increased wages and living standards. But for them to actually happen, and trickle down to workers, people had to fight hard. The modern working standards are literally written in tears and blood of our forefathers.

wiz21c 8y ago
>>> people had to fight hard that's the unfortunate truth about "wealth redistribution" (aka "inequality"). it's quite logical : those who have much don't feel the need to give as much as those who feel the need to have more.
- TeMPOraL 8y ago
  It wasn't really about wealth redistribution. It was about not exploiting people to the limits of possibility, and then discarding the hulks. The work conditions during early industrial revolution were inhumane.
a1369209993 8y ago
Technically, (somewhat) increased living standards are a inevitable consequence of significant production improvements in a not-completely-disfunctional economy. That doesn't really help in the short term though. Also: > literally written in tears and blood figuratively; tears and blood make shit writing materials.
- BeetleB 8y ago
  You must have not gotten the memo about the word "literally" http://blog.nawaz.org/posts/2012/Aug/merriam-webster-is-rolling-in-his-grave-literally/ http://blog.nawaz.org/posts/2012/Aug/merriam-webster-is-roll...
  - a1369209993 8y ago
    Until you can provide a alternative word that only means "literally", "literally" means "literally", not "figuratively".
    - BeetleB 8y ago
      >Until you can provide a alternative word that only means "literally", "literally" means "literally", not "figuratively". You're welcome to use the word as you please. The majority of the English speaking world, however, disagrees with you. If you care about clarity and precision, "literally" is a word to avoid.

jacquesm 8y ago

Yes, but that is not something the Luddites could see from where they were standing and plenty of them did end up hungry. The problem with progress is that it does nothing whatsoever for those that are being displaced, and to tell them to 'have the long view' does not solve their immediate problems.

digi_owl 8y ago
Across time the vast majority of crime seems to originate with hunger and other desperate situations.
- hinkley 8y ago
  As the saying goes: revolutions happen when the price of bread goes too high.
  - digi_owl 8y ago
    And something we witnessed during the Arab Spring.
    - triangleman 8y ago
      He's right: https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2011/jul/17/bread-food-arab-spring https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2011/jul/17/bread-f...
michaelscott 8y ago
Humans just don't live long enough to benefit as a generation when it comes to this kind of rapid and radical progress, which is sad. That said, I think the issue is largely one of mindset. Although we don't live very long, we are unusually adaptable, a feature which becomes lost in the comfort of an agreeable status quo. Unfortunately for the Luddites, it wasn't a feature that manifested again when that status quo was upended.

digi_owl 8y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enclosure https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enclosure

gaius 8y ago

It raised the workers wages and increased living standards for everyone Right, but the pitch goes something like this: "sometime after you and your family have starved to death, people you've never met will enjoy increased living standards, and they won't even remember you or your sacrifice, pretty neat huh?". Not very compelling, is it? Would you take that deal? Something like it is being offered to Workers in the trucking industry right now...

stochastic_monk 8y ago
And it's far from the only such industry. We need something like universal basic income, or one of two alternatives will happen: most people will suffer in droves, or they'll break out the metaphorical guillotine of our times. The people at the top of the economic foodchain are usually for too short-sighted to consider what will happen then.
crispyporkbites 8y ago
Our current working environment is quite different now though, for the Luddites the only major employers in the area would have been the factories, and mobility just wasn’t there (you had to live within walking distance of your employer for obvious reasons). A trucker can find another job, and it’s not like we are going to remove truckers overnight, if ever, self driving cars are always a couple of years away and there will be major regulatory and employment hurdles to overcome before those jobs are taken out. It’s not comparable to dropping a new machine into a factory.

twblalock 8y ago

This is an oversimplifying response to an article that brings some nuance into history of the period. Understanding history is not just about passing verdicts on the outcomes with the benefit of hindsight. It's about understanding the process of change, why it happened, and how people living at the time viewed the changes and reacted to them. An article like this sheds light on a lot of those topics, including people's beliefs about their economic rights at that time. It corrects common misconceptions about the Luddites. It demonstrates that the outcomes of the Industrial Revolution were not inevitable, and that people's understanding of what was going on at the time was very different than our understanding of it today. It opens the door to further research for people interested in the topic. It doesn't deserve a handwavy dismissal.

rijoja 8y ago
Which misconceptions? I read up until he even pulled the racism card and learned exactly nothing. Obviously they didn't destroy all technology a feat which would require a lot of technology.

nabla9 8y ago

If you define industrial revolution narrowly just as technological revolution and new industries, you are wrong. If you defined as a change in the whole society, you are right. Technological advances -> new industries -> social tensions and hard political battle -> social changes -> living standards increased for everyone.

Finnucane 8y ago

Everyone makes a living wage from their work?

coldtea 8y ago

>The effect of industrial revolution was not just factory owners being wealthier or more powerful. It raised the workers wages and increased living standards for everyone Which doesn't matter much when you and your family starves -- as their families did, and workers fucked over by globalization and automation do. One could shrug it off as "the cost of progress", but that's a luxury one has only when they are among those benefiting from it.