Understood properly, Luddites are an early precursor to what would become the labor movement later in the century, as well as the broader philosophical school o

Understood properly, Luddites are an early precursor to what would become the labor movement later in the century, as well as the broader philosophical school of personalism that congealed around the same timeframe. All together they were (and are) voices dissatisfied with the injustices and dehumanization of both unchecked capitalism and socialism both. A central idea is the basic fact that, quoting William Morris, “Nothing should be made by man's labour which is not worth making, or which must be made by labour degrading to the makers.” Or more simply: people first. There is a surprisingly rich vein of thought that relates here from the Vatican from perhaps 30 years after the Luddites, on to the present day: ... This circumstance constitutes in itself the most eloquent "Gospel of work", showing that the basis for determining the value of human work is not primarily the kind of work being done but the fact that the one who is doing it is a person. The sources of the dignity of work are to be sought primarily in the subjective dimension, not in the objective one. Such a concept practically does away with the very basis of the ancient differentiation of people into classes according to the kind of work done. This does not mean that, from the objective point of view, human work cannot and must not be rated and qualified in any way. It only means that the primary basis of the value of work is Man himself, who is its subject. This leads immediately to a very important conclusion of an ethical nature: however true it may be that man is destined for work and called to it, in the first place work is "for man" and not man "for work". Through this conclusion one rightly comes to recognize the pre-eminence of the subjective meaning of work over the objective one. Given this way of understanding things, and presupposing that different sorts of work that people do can have greater or lesser objective value, let us try nevertheless to show that each sort is judged above all by the measure of the dignity of the subject of work, that is to say the person, the individual who carries it out. On the other hand: independently of the work that every man does, and presupposing that this work constitutes a purpose-at times a very demanding one-of his activity, this purpose does not possess a definitive meaning in itself. In fact, in the final analysis it is always man who is the purpose of the work, whatever work it is that is done by man-even if the common scale of values rates it as the merest "service", as the most monotonous even the most alienating work. (laborem execrens, 1981) Pratchett fans may notice that personalist thinking sounds Weatherwaxian, and you'd be right! "There's no grays, only white that's got grubby. I'm surprised you don't know that. And sin, young man, is when you treat people like things. Including yourself. That's what sin is." Or from MLK: "...to use the terminology of the Jewish philosopher Martin Buber, substitutes an "I it" relationship for an "I thou" relationship and ends up relegating persons to the status of things."