Return of the Luddites

[Makalakumu]

I found this article particularly interesting...

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/3.06/saleskatz.html

We'll start with a bit of history that I had no idea about.

The term "Luddite" is kicked around a fair amount, but few understand who the Luddites were. Members of a radical agrarian movement, they surfaced in Robin Hood country - Sherwood Forest, near Nottinghamshire - for 15 bloody months. The Luddites violently opposed the factories and mills whose construction ushered in the Industrial Revolution. They may or may not have been led by a "Ned Ludd" honored in at least one old Luddite song:
Chant no more your old rhymes about bold Robin Hood
His feats I but little admire,
I will sing the Atchievements of General Ludd
Now the Hero of Nottinghamshire.


The Luddites were fighting for their way of life in the most literal sense. For centuries, they had lived in small villages in ancient valleys, using simple machines that could be operated by individuals or families.
Big mills and factories meant an end to social custom and community, to personal status and individual freedom. Having worked independently on their own farms, they would be forced to use complex and dangerous machines in noisy, smelly factories for long hours, seven days a week, for slave wages. Their harvest and agricultural rituals, practiced for centuries, would perish. Fathers could no longer be with their wives and children. This new kind of labor changed notions of time and introduced concepts like work schedules and hourly wages. It despoiled whole regions, including Sherwood Forest.
The Industrial Revolution was, of course, much too big a train for these farmers and artisans to throw themselves in front of. Once their insurrection was put down, the Luddites became a footnote to one of the most relentless transformations in human history. Yet the battle was a fierce one because the stakes were so high. We remember it because they still are.

I guess this movement has seen something of a revival when it comes to digital technology.


[FONT=verdana, helvetica, arial, sans-serif]

[FONT=verdana, helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Reality check: the original Luddite struggle at the dawn of the Industrial Revolution lasted all of 15 months,went down to utter defeat, and accomplished absolutely nothing. [/FONT]
[FONT=verdana, helvetica, arial, sans-serif]
According to Jon Katz, these latest Luddite wannabes are destined to suffer a similar fate - because neither technology nor the essential human desire for change can be suppressed.
</I>
Is technology a good witch or a bad witch?

In this country, where faith in technology is the closest thing we have to a national religion, and in the new media culture, where belief in technology is a religion, it's a riveting question. Few significant political or cultural entities - major papers, political parties, academic institutions, religious groups - have ever been openly antitechnology. Americans believe, after all, that machines can do anything; they can remove tumors, win wars, fly to the moon. Yet ferocious resistance - and bitter resentment - greets much of what technology produces: Beavis and Butt-head, rap music, auto emissions, videogames, breast implants, noise pollution, intrusive hackers, TV tabloids, and sexually explicit newsgroups. This digital-age ambivalence has resurrected the specter of the fabled Luddites, rebellious village workers in early 19th-century England who tried to stop the onrushing Industrial Revolution.[/FONT]

What do you think?[/FONT][FONT=verdana, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][/FONT]

 

[tshadowchaser]

Not sure what your asking realy but hear are a few thoughts:

Is technology a good witch or a bad witch?

it is the two edged sword. It helps but at the same time it cuts away some of the old and eliminates those that do not keep up with it

This digital-age ambivalence has resurrected the specter of the fabled Luddites, rebellious village workers in early 19th-century England who tried to stop the onrushing Industrial Revolution

this may be but unless a global event causes everyone to lose electricity, oil production, manufacturing, and the internet I think no I fear that man will become a slave to technology. The few who live a rustic life and eak out a living off the land are fast becoming extinct

 

[crushing]

Is technology a good witch or a bad witch?

Technology is not good, technology is not bad. People can be good and/or bad and create and manipulate technology to meet their wants and needs.

Are we civilized and sophisticated enough for the level of technology that we have achieved?

 

[Kacey]

Technology is not good, technology is not bad. People can be good and/or bad and create and manipulate technology to meet their wants and needs.

You beat me to it. Technology is a tool, and like any other tool, it can be used for good or ill. You could as well ask if fire is good or evil, because while fire is a tool that can be used for good, it can also destroy - and both can occur on small and large scales. This, I think leads into your next point:

Are we civilized and sophisticated enough for the level of technology that we have achieved?

And I have to say that I'm not sure. Because there is such a wide variation in people, access to technology, use of technology, and so on, I'm not sure there's a clear answer.

 

[CoryKS]

Katz has a track record of hyperventilating over the latest perceived threat - his work after Columbine was waaaay over the top. But I did get a chuckle this weekend at Borders over this book. Glenn Reynolds reviewed it here, likening it to Grampa Simpson vs. The Internet.

 

[CoryKS]

Are we civilized and sophisticated enough for the level of technology that we have achieved?

I think that was the gist of Ted Kasczinsky's manifesto, wasn't it? I've never had much use for the question, because it's moot - once you open that bottle you can't put the genie back, so it really doesn't matter if we are civilized and sophisticated enough for it. We just have to deal with things as they are.

 

[crushing]

I think that was the gist of Ted Kasczinsky's manifesto, wasn't it? I've never had much use for the question, because it's moot - once you open that bottle you can't put the genie back, so it really doesn't matter if we are civilized and sophisticated enough for it. We just have to deal with things as they are.

I was thinking more along the lines of Klaatu, but Kaczynski and his manifesto is a much better example.

I see the question more in philosophical terms as what it says about people in general rather than a basis for action; for basically the same reasons that you consider it moot.

 

[CoryKS]

I was thinking more along the lines of Klaatu, but Kaczynski and his manifesto is a much better example.

I see the question more in philosophical terms as what it says about people in general rather than a basis for action; for basically the same reasons that you consider it moot.

Yeah, but Klaatu had better hair.

Ever read Tommyknockers by Stephen King? A woman unearths a spaceship in her back yard that inspires people to invent gadgets to kill each other.

*** SPOILER ALERT ***
If I remember correctly, the aliens crash-landed the ship because they were busy fighting with each other. All that technology, and it didn't change their nature one bit.
*** SPOILER ALERT ***