The term "Luddite" has become synonymous with "technophobe" but that's not what the Luddites were about. They were a labour movement that fought to give workers control over the technology that was advancing without oversight and rapidly automating them out of their jobs.

"Luddite" as a pejorative was a technocrat PR coup.

@Wolven they were a labor movement that fought against technology that was set to improve society for all because they were busy clinging to the old ways out of a sense of self-entitlement.

It wasn't a technocrat PR coup. It was society as a whole telling them to knock it off for the sake of the general welfare.

@volkris yeah nah. "Improving society" by putting people out of work while still demanding they pay in to capital isn't really an improvement

@Wolven @volkris The irony of the whole debate is, it isn't an either-or proposition. If the money made from the machines went to the people they replaced, instead of to some 3rd party investor who did nothing but have money already, then improving society could happen without impoverishing a group of people. If industrialism had manifested as worker cooperatives instead of capitalist enterprises, this would have been the natural outcome. But some rich dudes figured out how to stick their fingers in the pie and call dibs, and here we are, still dealing with the same ridiculous issues.

@hosford42 "nothing but have money already" is no trifle.

Those people sacrificed for the greater good, turning down other opportunities to benefit with that money, putting it toward society-improving projects instead.

To be clear, I'm not saying it was charity or that they were good people or anything like that, but for them to forego their own immediate benefit for the sake of a project for the greater good is itself something we should be glad happened.

If industrialism had manifested as worker cooperatives instead of capitalist enterprises then society as a whole would have probably been worse off.
@Wolven

@volkris @Wolven @hosford42 Worse off? like exploited domestic and foreign labor and destruction of the environment for profit? People are innovative and discoveries often happen in spite of the for proti model, not because of. Co-ops would have gladly taken to tech as they would have been the beneficiaries. Also, what kicked off the second industrial revolution was replaceable machined precision parts, Something driven by the ingenious concept that any invention discovered by someone with a government contract became free and open source which causes massive explosion of shared ideas and innovation. The same was true with software until Gates innovated the mob tactics of protecting his IP religiously, never mind that he designed it on tax payer paid free computer time. Currently we have not innovation, just more ways to extract money because we are in a second gilded age. It wasn't until workers organized that people started enjoying the benefits of those things we worked hard for and paid money for pure science research on instead of all that money going toward and handful of the few.
Follow

@anubis2814

Gates innovated the mob tactics of protecting his IP religiously? No, that's not how that works in reality.

In reality, the same governments who provided that free computer time also provided the IP structure and restrictions on usage of ideas.

That's not up to Gates but to our active support and reelection of the politicians who implement those policies.

We get the government we vote for as we keep reelecting the same types of folks with the same bad ideas.
@Wolven @hosford42

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.