3 ms·
Another vote for the book linked in the article. It gets into the history of how machines were introduced into the textile industry in England. Wealthy mill own
by dopylitty 2y ago
Another vote for the book linked in the article. It gets into the history of how machines were introduced into the textile industry in England. Wealthy mill owners forced child laborers to run the machines while simultaneously making the artisan workers unable to sustain themselves or their families by producing shoddy low quality items in bulk.
As always the problem wasn't necessarily the machines but that they were controlled by wealthy mill owners who reaped all the profits and left the rest of society to starve. England really was patient zero for the toxic economic system still being used in the US.
- sershe 2y agoThis is at best misdirection. So, let's say England then had robust labor rights. Perhaps there's no child labor and instead, the same workers now use the machines, except most of them are fired and get 6 months of severance. Heck let's make it even better and say new skilled workers are needed for the machines and so the salaries for the remaining minority of workers are doubled. Do you think the fired workers wouldn't have attacked the machines? I think they totally would have. The only labor regime where they wouldn't is where they are maintained in perpetuity even though their labor is useless. Something like Soviet Union with "guaranteed jobs", or NYC construction unions with 5x staffing on the same jobs vs even the European companies... all great examples to emulate for "labor movements"!