Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!ucla-cs!zen!ucbvax!hplabs!hplabsc!taylor
From: db@itspna.ed.ac.uk (Dave Berry)
Newsgroups: comp.society
Subject: Luddites
Message-ID: <2179@hplabsc.HP.COM>
Date: Mon, 6-Jul-87 17:42:28 EDT
Article-I.D.: hplabsc.2179
Posted: Mon Jul  6 17:42:28 1987
Date-Received: Wed, 8-Jul-87 01:37:13 EDT
Sender: taylor@hplabsc.HP.COM
Distribution: world
Lines: 21
Approved: taylor@hplabs

Several people use the word "Luddite" quite freely to denigrate an opposing
point of view.  I think this ignores several aspects of the Luddite movement.

There is research showing that the textile machines which the Luddites
were rebelling against were specifically designed to remove the workers
control of their working lives.  See for example papers included in
"The Social Shaping of Technology", edited by Donald Mackenzie and
Judy Wadjceman (sp?).  Furthermore, several people lost their jobs, and
therefore their income, through the introduction of this technology.
Bear in mind that this was before the welfare state.

Thus although the Luddites may have expressed their fears in religious and
anti-technological terms, their fears were not groundless.  Even though
society as a whole, including ourselves, may have benefitted from the
new technology, many people suffered as a result.  To accuse these people
of ignorance because they protested against this suffering, in the only ways
they knew how, seems rather unsympathetic.

The question I would like to see more work on is this: can we minimise the
sufering from the development of new technologies without hindering that
development?