4 ms·

While I certainly don't condone the way the English state put down the Luddites, if it had not, it's quite possible that England would not have led the way in i

by rmah 3y ago

While I certainly don't condone the way the English state put down the Luddites, if it had not, it's quite possible that England would not have led the way in industrialization. And that spurred other nations to push too or be left behind. England changed radically during the 1800's as they pushed the industrial envelope.

arcticbull 3y ago
This is a bit of a misconception. The Luddites were not anti-technology, they were a workers rights movement. Many of them were machine operators who smashed machines to protest for better working conditions, pay, and apprenticeships. > Despite their modern reputation, the original Luddites were neither opposed to technology nor inept at using it. Many were highly skilled machine operators in the textile industry. Nor was the technology they attacked particularly new. Moreover, the idea of smashing machines as a form of industrial protest did not begin or end with them. [edit] > One technology the Luddites commonly attacked was the stocking frame, a knitting machine first developed more than 200 years earlier by an Englishman named William Lee. I'm surprised this article continues to play into these misconceptions. [1] The government violently quashed a labor movement that chose to protest by breaking machines, not an anti-technology movement. Wasn't the first time, and certainly wasn't the last. [1] https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/what-the-luddites-really-fought-against-264412/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/what-the-luddites-rea...
- CamperBob2 3y ago
  From a parent post: they were fairly successful at staving off automation of their professions From your post: The Luddites were not anti-technology Both of these statements can't be true. Which one (if either) is correct?
  - namaria 3y ago
    You're conflating technology usage with automation in the service of the owning class, which are not the same thing.
    - CamperBob2 3y ago
      I'm in the US; we're not into the whole Marxist class-struggle thing. Technically, over half of us are in the "owner class" simply by contributing to a 401(k). One thing that people who log onto HN and advocate a class war never seem to understand is that they have far more to lose in such a "struggle" than they could ever gain. Our chains rest pretty lightly on our shoulders, all things considered.
      - namaria 3y ago
        I have never read Marx and have no opinion about his works. Doesn't change the fact that owners of capital can use automation in detriment of workers and you are splitting hairs to avoid the point: Luddites were technology users who opposed automation being used at the expense of their jobs and your oversimplification doesn't hold water.
        CamperBob2 3y ago
        Their main mistake was thinking that anyone else gave a hoot about their jobs. What's actually best for society? Obviously allowing the Luddites to hold the industrial revolution at bay would not have been a long-term win. If you disagree, well, other sites beckon.
        namaria 3y ago
        You seem to be a very technically smart person. But it's not uncommon for people of high technical knowledge to assume that historical, sociological problems are ultimately technical and thus by analogy easily understood from their skill set point of view. It is also not uncommon for such people to think Luddite is a dirty word nominating ignorant laborers who tried to arrest progress. These people are wrong. History and sociology have a lot of irreducible complexity and analogies and systematization are usually misleading. There is a lot of literature linking Luddite movements with organized and progressive labor movement. As is " What's actually best for society?" > Luddites to hold the industrial revolution at bay They never tried to do such a thing. Rather, they made an effort to steer it in a way that would be more socially equitable, such as advocating for better coordination and communication between management and laborers, not unlike the system Germany - a very successful and technically advanced industrial power - has in place currently. Machine destruction was a last resort sort of action with a high correlation with suppression of other outlets for industrial action, such as strict enforcement of the legislation outright banning of any workers associations. > If you disagree, well, other sites beckon. This is plain false dichotomy. Equating disagreeing with you with being wrong is not very conducive of an open discussion and I think this kind of posturing has not place in a forum such as this one.
kennywinker 3y ago
Industrialization hasn't exactly been a clear win. The environmental toll is still something we're grappling with, it created a type of poverty that hadn't existed before, and it drove at least two world-scale wars. In other words: don't threaten me with a good time.
- CamperBob2 3y ago
  Industrialization hasn't exactly been a clear win. The sheer privilege you're flaunting... the sheer gall. Just wow. Do you put yourself more in the position of the machine-owner...? asks the person holding a teraflop-class computer in their hand, without a trace of irony.
  - kennywinker 3y ago
    I didn’t ask for the world to be organized the way it is, I just live here. Does this device make my life better? Only in the sense that it helps me navigate the world that I live in better. In another world, this device would not be helpful nor desirable.

by rmah 3y ago

arcticbull 3y ago

This is a bit of a misconception. The Luddites were not anti-technology, they were a workers rights movement. Many of them were machine operators who smashed machines to protest for better working conditions, pay, and apprenticeships. > Despite their modern reputation, the original Luddites were neither opposed to technology nor inept at using it. Many were highly skilled machine operators in the textile industry. Nor was the technology they attacked particularly new. Moreover, the idea of smashing machines as a form of industrial protest did not begin or end with them. [edit] > One technology the Luddites commonly attacked was the stocking frame, a knitting machine first developed more than 200 years earlier by an Englishman named William Lee. I'm surprised this article continues to play into these misconceptions. [1] The government violently quashed a labor movement that chose to protest by breaking machines, not an anti-technology movement. Wasn't the first time, and certainly wasn't the last. [1] https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/what-the-luddites-really-fought-against-264412/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/what-the-luddites-rea...

CamperBob2 3y ago
From a parent post: they were fairly successful at staving off automation of their professions From your post: The Luddites were not anti-technology Both of these statements can't be true. Which one (if either) is correct?
- namaria 3y ago
  You're conflating technology usage with automation in the service of the owning class, which are not the same thing.
  - CamperBob2 3y ago
    I'm in the US; we're not into the whole Marxist class-struggle thing. Technically, over half of us are in the "owner class" simply by contributing to a 401(k). One thing that people who log onto HN and advocate a class war never seem to understand is that they have far more to lose in such a "struggle" than they could ever gain. Our chains rest pretty lightly on our shoulders, all things considered.
    - namaria 3y ago
      I have never read Marx and have no opinion about his works. Doesn't change the fact that owners of capital can use automation in detriment of workers and you are splitting hairs to avoid the point: Luddites were technology users who opposed automation being used at the expense of their jobs and your oversimplification doesn't hold water.
      - CamperBob2 3y ago
        Their main mistake was thinking that anyone else gave a hoot about their jobs. What's actually best for society? Obviously allowing the Luddites to hold the industrial revolution at bay would not have been a long-term win. If you disagree, well, other sites beckon.
        namaria 3y ago
        You seem to be a very technically smart person. But it's not uncommon for people of high technical knowledge to assume that historical, sociological problems are ultimately technical and thus by analogy easily understood from their skill set point of view. It is also not uncommon for such people to think Luddite is a dirty word nominating ignorant laborers who tried to arrest progress. These people are wrong. History and sociology have a lot of irreducible complexity and analogies and systematization are usually misleading. There is a lot of literature linking Luddite movements with organized and progressive labor movement. As is " What's actually best for society?" > Luddites to hold the industrial revolution at bay They never tried to do such a thing. Rather, they made an effort to steer it in a way that would be more socially equitable, such as advocating for better coordination and communication between management and laborers, not unlike the system Germany - a very successful and technically advanced industrial power - has in place currently. Machine destruction was a last resort sort of action with a high correlation with suppression of other outlets for industrial action, such as strict enforcement of the legislation outright banning of any workers associations. > If you disagree, well, other sites beckon. This is plain false dichotomy. Equating disagreeing with you with being wrong is not very conducive of an open discussion and I think this kind of posturing has not place in a forum such as this one.

kennywinker 3y ago

Industrialization hasn't exactly been a clear win. The environmental toll is still something we're grappling with, it created a type of poverty that hadn't existed before, and it drove at least two world-scale wars. In other words: don't threaten me with a good time.

CamperBob2 3y ago
Industrialization hasn't exactly been a clear win. The sheer privilege you're flaunting... the sheer gall. Just wow. Do you put yourself more in the position of the machine-owner...? asks the person holding a teraflop-class computer in their hand, without a trace of irony.
- kennywinker 3y ago
  I didn’t ask for the world to be organized the way it is, I just live here. Does this device make my life better? Only in the sense that it helps me navigate the world that I live in better. In another world, this device would not be helpful nor desirable.