Luddism
The
Opposition of Technology
By Serena
Marie Heider
CSC
131
Technology is always evolving and over the past few decades, computer technology has greatly changed the way we live. All these changes are welcomed by many, but there is a group of people, called Luddites, who oppose or distrust the advancement of technology. This issue obviously pertains to computer technology and everything that comes is made possible because of it. Luddism has a long history and the term, ‘Luddite,’ has been adapted to those today who are against future and modern technology.
Luddism began with a revolt in 1811; this was ‘an action against the English Textile factories that displaced craftsmen in favor of machines.’ (http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~mryder/itc_data/luddite.html) Ned Ludd is said to be the leader of the revolution and is also said to have destroyed two large stocking-frames that produced inexpensive stockings undercutting those produced by skilled knitters, and whose signature appears on a "workers manifesto" of the time. (http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/Luddite) Whether or not Ludd actually existed is historically unknown.
Luddism spread to neighboring areas and revolts were against many new technologies. “One of the most serious Luddite attacks took place at Rawfolds Mill near Brighouse in Yorkshire. William Cartwright, the owner of Rawfolds Mill, had been using cloth-finishing machinery since 1811. Local croppers began losing their jobs and after a meeting at Saint Crispin public house, they decided to try to destroy the cloth-finishing machinery at Rawfolds Mill. Cartwright was suspecting trouble and arranged for the mill to be protected by armed guards. Led by George Mellor, a young cropper from Huddersfield, the attack on Rawfolds Mill took place on 11th April, 1812. The Luddites failed in gaining entry and by the time they left, two of the croppers had been mortally wounded. Seven days later the Luddites killed William Horsfall, another large mill-owner in the area. The authorities rounded up over a hundred suspects. Of these, sixty-four were indicted. Three men were executed for the murder of Horsfall and another fourteen were hung for the attack on Rawfolds Millogies.” (http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/PRluddites.htm) Nonetheless, the revolts were unsuccessful in changing the use of new and easier technology. Some may agree that the revolts should not have been so harmful and tried in a manner other than destruction. If the revolts were less destructive, perhaps the Luddites would have received more respect. Others argue that, like with any revolt, there was no other way to stress the seriousness of the issue.
Another issue in history that caused revolts was the lack of wheat, which caused the prices to soar. “Handloom weavers […] in Manchester, Oldham, Ashton, Rochdale, Stockport and Macclesfield were unable to feed their families. On 20th April several thousand men attacked Burton's Mill at Middleton near Manchester. Emanuel Burton, who knew that his policy of buying power-looms had upset local handloom weavers, had recruited armed guards and three members of the crowd were killed by musket-fire. The following day the men returned and after failing to break-in to the mill, they burnt down Emanuel Burton's house. The military arrived and another seven men were killed.” (http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/PRluddites.htm) Once again the Luddites turned to destruction after not being heard. In this case, the issue is much more serious and can be seen today on a lower level. The new technology of power-looms destroyed a thousand or more jobs and the old hand weavers could not get work because the power-looms were more dependable, quicker and produced more goods than the hand weavers possible could. Nevertheless, the new machine took over many jobs that people would normally do and caused many to go hungry; today, many are laid off because they are not needed. Machines replaced people, computer-run robots replaced the machinist and there are many other instances in which computers are taking over the jobs of humans.
The Luddite members of England in the early 1800’s:
“would gather, in the darkness of the night, in the surrounding forests of the towns and villages that they attacked. The attacks were well organized as well. Armed men were placed at the front of the group, so that as they entered the victim's shop the show of force and weapons would discouraging the owner from interfering. While these men were occupied with restraining the owner another group with hammers would begin breaking the machines. During the attack several others members were stationed around the outside of the shop, keeping watch for the authorities. Once they accomplished what they sought to do they would disappear back into the woods before the authorities could even give chase. Members of these Luddite groups did not identify themselves to each other with names but used numbers instead. On the occasion a group's member was sent into an unfamiliar town to locate other Luddites he would walk the streets occasionally raising his right hand over his right eye. If someone were a Luddite, the proper response was for them to gesture likewise except they would do it with their left hand and eye. However most groups operated independently, only occasionally enlisting the help of neighboring Luds.” (http://www.gober.net/victorian/reports/luddites.html)
As can be seen, the Luddites were very organized in the beginning. The great organization, however, did not cause much change for the future of technology. Today, technology continues to prosper with many, though a small percentage of the whole population, still following Luddite beliefs. The organization is also much less secretive and Luddites, in most cases, know better than to destroy computers.
From these examples of the Luddite destructive revolts, one can see why the term Luddite is often thought of negatively. However, neo-luddites fight against such technologies as road building, nuclear power, toxic chemicals and open cast mining. “Luddisms promotion of local economies, small-scale production and cohesive communities is closer to green ideals than we ever imagined. The New Luddites plan to campaign for a less arrogant science and technology, just as groups within the DIY Culture movement such as The Land Is Ours and Earth First! have crusaded for the protection of land for people and nature. Rather than letting it remain a term of abuse, we can restore Luddite as the proud battle-cry for a new generation of non-violent direct action.” (http://www-users.york.ac.uk/~socs203/luddites.htm) Nonetheless, neo-luddites are taking a much more political approach in their resistance to harmful technology.
One controversial issue is the idea of Luddites posting information on
the Internet or sending email. Many New Luddites are
uncomfortable with using Email. “There has been concern that Email is both
exclusive and ultimately puts people like post-persons out of a job. Taking
these concerns on board Ned Ludd has decided to set up an Email account with
Green-Net, part of the Association for Progressive Communications. Ned gives a
faithful undertaking to publicize things just as fully to Luddites by post as on
the Internet.” (http://www-users.york.ac.uk/~socs203/luddites.htm)
Another issue is the idea of having websites about Luddism; moreover, the
question is whether Luddites should create websites. The idea is quite ironic,
to use a new computer technology to advertise something that is against that
same technology.
Neo-Luddites are more numerous today than one might assume, “technopessimists without the power and access of the techno-optimists but still with a not-insignificant voice, shelves of books and documents and reports, and increasing numbers of followers--maybe a quarter of the adult population, according to a Newsweek survey. Neo-Luddites are to be found on the radical and direct-action side of environmentalism, particularly in the American West; they are on the dissenting edges of academic economics and ecology departments, generally of the no-growth school; they are everywhere in Indian Country throughout the Americas, representing a traditional biocentrism against the anthropocentric norm; they are activists fighting against nuclear power, irradiated food, clearcutting, animal experiments, toxic waste, and the killing of whales, among the many aspects of the high-tech onslaught.” (http://www.ensu.ucalgary.ca/~terry/luddite/sale.html) In every possible setting, one can definitely find a person with Luddite views. Some oppose the idea of using technology to grow better crops because the affects on the environment. Others believe that new technology is ‘unnatural,’ claiming that altering with what the world provides is against natural laws.
Some neo-luddites are not entirely against the advancement of technology, some are merely opposed to the type of technology that is available. For instance, Chris Taylor from TIME magazine states, “Laptops run out of juice. Desktops get unplugged from walls. Powercuts happen. And every time you do endure a restart, you have to wait an eternity for OS X to launch the "classic" environment, which it has to do any time you launch a program made prior to OS X.” (http://www.time.com/time/columnist/taylor/article/0,9565,167232,00.html) There are many that are opposed to computer technology but believe that machinery is needed. Some people are against gene manipulation in order to grow a better, bigger crop to feed the hungry, but are not resistant to having email. The analysis of the correct answer will never be clear because there is no possible moral standard to follow of what is right or wrong.
It’s only in the last couple decades that Luddites have began to once again take action against higher technology. The first revolts began with physical destruction of the new technology; but today, while some neo-Luddites still destroy the physical technology, most Luddites speak up in political environments. The idea of Luddism will be present as long as technology is evolving; and with the continuance of higher technology being developed, perhaps people will become more aware for themselves the seriousness of the issues proposed by Luddites. “Just as the second Industrial Revolution has its roots quite specifically in the first--the machines may change, but their machineness does not--so those today who are moved in some measure to resist (or who even hope to reverse) the tide of industrialism might find their most useful analogues, if not their models exactly, in those Luddites of the nineteenth century.” (http://www.ensu.ucalgary.ca/~terry/luddite/sale.html)
http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~mryder/itc_data/luddite.html
University of Colorado at Denver School of Education
Luddism and the Neo-Luddite Reaction January 12, 2002
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/PRluddites.htm
Spartacus Educational The Luddites
Last updated: 12th May, 2002
http://www.gober.net/victorian/reports/luddites.html
The Luddites by Felix Silverio
09/28/99
http://www.ensu.ucalgary.ca/~terry/luddite/sale.html
LESSONS FROM THE LUDDITES
THE NATION, by Kirkpatrick
Sale
Setting Limits On Technology June 5, 1995
http://www-users.york.ac.uk/~socs203/luddites.htm
The NEW LUDDITE : A challenge to the legitimacy of science and technology...
1796 - 1999
http://www.time.com/time/columnist/taylor/article/0,9565,167232,00.html
TIME Magazine Wednesday, Jul. 11, 2001
TIME Silicon Valley columnist Chris Taylor loses patience with Apple's new operating system