3 ms·
Benefits for extra productivity filter up to the shareholders not to the workers producing the extra productivity. This reminds me of the Luddite movement in E
by terminalgravity 4mo ago
Benefits for extra productivity filter up to the shareholders not to the workers producing the extra productivity.
This reminds me of the Luddite movement in England. Industrial machines were disrupting the textile industry. The Luddites were not anti technology they were against technology allowing employers to suppress wages and working conditions and for increasing the quality of life and more humane working conditions for the extra productivity.
As we know their movement was not successful giving rise to the bleak images of industrial factory life in England. I think all that will happen is workers will expect to be more productive than before but their skills will be less compensated because “the machine” did most of the work.
https://theconversation.com/im-a-luddite-you-should-be-one-too-163172 https://theconversation.com/im-a-luddite-you-should-be-one-t...
- Aurornis 4mo ago> The Luddites were not anti technology they were against technology allowing employers to suppress wages and working conditions and for increasing the quality of life and more humane working conditions for the extra productivity. I’m seeing this talking point circulated a lot recently but it’s not really the whole story. Luddites weren’t on a selfless crusade to steal from the rich and give to the poor. They wanted to fight off competition for their specific jobs. They didn’t want anyone having access to cheaper fabrics and clothes and other things because that was their golden goose. They wanted to be in control and force you to go through the inefficient methods to get those things because it benefited themselves. A closer modern day analog would be something like the dock workers striking to keep automation out of ports. They have a sweet gig and they don’t want machines doing anything to jeopardize their stranglehold on ports, even if it would benefit literally everyone else in the entire country if we could modernize our ports like the rest of the world.
- __loam 4mo ago[flagged]
- Helloworldboy 4mo ago[dead]
- warkdarrior 4mo agoI don't know, since I cannot afford the boot. Apparently it was priced way out of my range because the boot was unloaded of a ship by an expensive human dock worker.
- tomhow 4mo agoWe've banned this account. There have been several warnings and the trend is only getting worse. We want HN to be a place to discuss difficult topics, and this should be a good place to discuss the relationship between labor and capital, given that there are many users on each side of the table. But such inflammatory, demeaning terminology as this just poisons the threads and makes it impossible to have constructive discussions.
- __loam 4mo ago[dead]
- GeoAtreides 4mo agoIt is you that is spreading misinformation. I suggest everyone thinking Aurornis is right, to read the article below, from the smithsonian. >But the Luddites themselves “were totally fine with machines,” says Kevin Binfield, editor of the 2004 collection Writings of the Luddites. They confined their attacks to manufacturers who used machines in what they called “a fraudulent and deceitful manner” to get around standard labor practices. >“They just wanted machines that made high-quality goods,” says Binfield, “and they wanted these machines to be run by workers who had gone through an apprenticeship and got paid decent wages. Those were their only concerns.”[1] https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/what-the-luddites-really-fought-against-264412/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/what-the-luddites-rea...
- Affenklang 4mo ago[dead]