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
Sacrifice?!
These people already have more resources than they could ever use, much less appreciate, in a thousand lifetimes-- but you think occasionally spending some of it in ways that would contribute to the stability and sustainability of humanity's future (thereby ALSO BENEFITING THEM by building a world that would be less the fuck ON FIRE) instead of just using it on MORE bookers, blow, and stock buybacks is some kind of gracious "sacrifice"??
I'm not sure whether to laugh or be sick.
@Wolven @volkris @violetmadder @hosford42
It’s cartoonish bootlicking. Propertied elites, wealthy on the backs of slaves and enclosure and colonialism, buy the labor of expropriated peasants and this is somehow supposed to be *selfless sacrifice for public benefit*?
@HeavenlyPossum selfless?
Whoever said selfless?
No, it's even better, it's an alignment of interests.
No need to rely on selflessness that might disappear from day to day.
@volkris
“Those people sacrificed for the greater good”
Those are literally your words.