Neo-Luddism

Last updated

Neo-Luddism or new Luddism is a philosophy opposing many forms of modern technology. [1] The term Luddite is generally used as a pejorative applied to people showing technophobic leanings. [2] The name is based on the historical legacy of the English Luddites, who were active between 1811 and 1817. [1] While the original Luddites were mostly concerned with the economic implications of improving technology in regards to industrialization, neo-Luddites tend to have a broader and more holistic distrust of technological improvement.

Contents

Neo-Luddism is a leaderless movement of non-affiliated groups who resist modern technologies and dictate a return of some or all technologies to a more primitive level. [3] Neo-Luddites are characterized by one or more of the following practices: passively abandoning the use of technology, harming those who produce technology harmful to the environment, advocating simple living, or sabotaging technology. The modern neo-Luddite movement has connections with the anti-globalization movement, anarcho-primitivism, radical environmentalism, and deep ecology. [3]

Neo-Luddism is based on the concern of the technological impact on individuals, their communities, and/or the environment, [4] Neo-Luddism stipulates the use of the precautionary principle for all new technologies, insisting that technologies be proven safe before adoption, due to the unknown effects that new technologies might inspire.

Philosophy

Neo-Luddism calls for slowing or stopping the development of new technologies. Neo-Luddism prescribes a lifestyle that abandons specific technologies, because of its belief that this is the best prospect for the future. As Robin and Webster put it, "a return to nature and what are imagined as more natural communities". In the place of industrial capitalism, neo-Luddism prescribes small-scale agricultural communities such as those of the Amish and the Chipko movement in Nepal and India [5] as models for the future.

Neo-Luddism denies the ability of any new technology to solve current problems, such as environmental degradation, [5] nuclear warfare and biological weapons, without creating more, potentially dangerous, problems. [6] [7]

In 1990, attempting to found a unified movement and reclaim the term Luddite, Chellis Glendinning published her "Notes towards a Neo-Luddite manifesto". In this paper, Glendinning describes neo-Luddites as "20th century citizens—activists, workers, neighbors, social critics, and scholars—who question the predominant modern worldview, which preaches that unbridled technology represents progress". [8] Glendinning voices an opposition to technologies that she deems destructive to communities or are materialistic and rationalistic. She proposes that technology encourages biases, and therefore should question if technologies have been created for specific interests, to perpetuate their specific values including short-term efficiency, ease of production and marketing, as well as profit. Glendinning also says that secondary aspects of technology, including social, economic and ecological implications, and not personal benefit need to be considered before adoption of technology into the technological system. [8]

Vision of the future without intervention

Neo-Luddism often establishes stark predictions about the effect of new technologies. Although there is not a cohesive vision of the ramifications of technology, neo-Luddism predicts that a future without technological reform has dire consequences. Neo-Luddites believe that current technologies are a threat to humanity and to the natural world in general, and that a future societal collapse is possible or even probable.

These predictions include changes in humanity's place in the future due to replacement of humans by computers, genetic decay of humans due to lack of natural selection, biological engineering of humans, misuse of technological power including disasters caused by genetically modified organisms, nuclear warfare, and biological weapons; control of humanity using surveillance, propaganda, pharmacological control, and psychological control; humanity failing to adapt to the future manifesting as an increase in psychological disorders, widening economic and political inequality, widespread social alienation, a loss of community, and massive unemployment; technology causing environmental degradation due to shortsightedness, overpopulation, and overcrowding. [5]

Types of intervention

In 1990, attempting to reclaim the term Luddite and found a unified movement, Glendinning published her "Notes towards a Neo-Luddite manifesto". In this paper, Glendinning proposes destroying the following technologies: electromagnetic technologies (this includes communications, computers, appliances, and refrigeration), chemical technologies (this includes synthetic materials and medicine), nuclear technologies (this includes weapons and power as well as cancer treatment, sterilization, and smoke detection), genetic engineering (this includes crops as well as insulin production). [8] She argues in favor of the "search for new technological forms" which are local in scale and promote social and political freedom.

Movement

Contemporary neo-Luddites are a widely diverse group of loosely affiliated or non-affiliated groups which includes "writers, academics, students, families, Amish, Mennonites, Quakers, environmentalists, "fallen-away yuppies", "ageing flower children" and "young idealists seeking a technology-free environment". [9] Some Luddites see themselves as victims of technology trying to prevent further victimization (such as Citizens Against Pesticide Misuse and Parents Against Underage Smartphones). Others see themselves as advocates for the natural order and resist environmental degradation by technology (such as Earth First!). [9]

One neo-Luddite assembly was the "Second Neo-Luddite Congress", held 13–15 April 1996, at a Quaker meeting hall in Barnesville, Ohio. On 24 February 2001, the "Teach-In on Technology and Globalization" was held at Hunter College in New York city with the purpose of bringing together critics of technology and globalization. [9] The two figures who are seen as the movement's founders are Glendinning and Kirkpatrick Sale. Prominent neo-Luddites include educator S. D. George, ecologist Stephanie Mills, Theodore Roszak, Scott Savage, Clifford Stoll, Bill McKibben, Neil Postman, Wendell Berry, Alan Marshall and Gene Logsdon. [5] [9] Postman, however, did not consider himself a Luddite. [10]

Relationship to violence and vandalism

Some neo-Luddites use vandalism or violence to achieve social change and promote their cause. [11]

In May 2012, credit for the shooting of Roberto Adinolfi, an Ansaldo Nucleare executive, was claimed by an anarchist group who targeted him for stating that none of the deaths following the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami were caused by the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster itself:

Adinolfi knows well that it is only a matter of time before a European Fukushima kills on our continent [...] Science in centuries past promised us a golden age, but it is pushing us towards self destruction and slavery [...] With our action we give back to you a small part of the suffering that you scientists are bringing to the world. [12]

Kaczynski, also known as the Unabomber, initially sabotaged developments near his cabin but dedicated himself to getting back at the system after discovering a road had been built over a plateau he had considered beautiful. Between 1978 and 1995, Kaczynski engaged in a nationwide bombing campaign against modern technology, planting or mailing numerous home-made bombs, killing three people and injuring 23 others. In his 1995 Unabomber manifesto, [13] Kaczynski states:

The kind of revolution we have in mind will not necessarily involve an armed uprising against any government. It may or may not involve physical violence, but it will not be a POLITICAL revolution. Its focus will be on technology and economics, not politics.

In August 2011 in Mexico a group or person calling itself Individualists Tending to the Wild perpetrated an attack with a bomb at the Monterrey Institute of Technology and Higher Education, State of Mexico Campus, intended for the coordinator of its Business Development Center and Technology Transfer. The attack was accompanied by the publication of a manifesto criticizing nanotechnology and computer science.

Sale says that neo-Luddites are not motivated to commit violence or vandalism. [14] The manifesto of the "Second Luddite Congress", which Sale took a major part in defining, attempts to redefine neo-Luddites as people who reject violent action. [9]

History

Origins of contemporary critiques of technology in literature

According to Julian Young, Martin Heidegger was a Luddite in his early philosophical phase and believed in the destruction of modern technology and a return to an earlier agrarian world. [15] However, the later Heidegger did not see technology as wholly negative and did not call for its abandonment or destruction. [16] In The Question Concerning Technology (1953), Heidegger posited that the modern technological "mode of Being" was one which viewed the natural world, plants, animals, and even human beings as a "standing-reserve"—resources to be exploited as means to an end. [16] To illustrate this "monstrousness", Heidegger uses the example of a hydroelectric plant on the Rhine river which turns the river from an unspoiled natural wonder to just a supplier of hydropower. In this sense, technology is not just the collection of tools, but a way of being in the world and of understanding the world which is instrumental and grotesque. According to Heidegger, this way of being defines the modern way of living in the West. [16] For Heidegger, this technological process ends up reducing beings to not-beings, which Heidegger calls 'the abandonment of being' and involves the loss of any sense of awe and wonder, as well as an indifference to that loss. [16]

One of the first major contemporary anti-technological thinkers was French philosopher Jacques Ellul. In his The Technological Society (1964), Ellul argued that logical and mechanical organization "eliminates or subordinates the natural world". Ellul defined technique as the entire totality of organizational methods and technology with a goal toward maximum rational efficiency. According to Ellul, technique has an impetus which tends to drown out human concerns: "The only thing that matters technically is yield, production. This is the law of technique; this yield can only be obtained by the total mobilization of human beings, body and soul, and this implies the exploitation of all human psychic forces." [17] In Industrial Revolution England, machines became cheaper to use than men. The five counties of Yorkshire, Lancashire, Cheshire, Derbyshire, and Nottinghamshire had a small uprising where they threatened those hired to guard the machines. [18] Another critic of political and technological expansion was Lewis Mumford, who wrote The Myth of the Machine . The views of Ellul influenced the ideas of the infamous American neo-Luddite Kaczynski. The opening of Kaczynski's manifesto reads: "The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race." [13] Other philosophers of technology who have questioned the validity of technological progress include Albert Borgmann, Don Ihde and Hubert Dreyfus. [5]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Luddite</span> Member of an 1810s English anti-textile-machinery organisation

The Luddites were members of a 19th-century movement of English textile workers who opposed the use of certain types of cost-saving machinery, and often destroyed the machines in clandestine raids. They protested against manufacturers who used machines in "a fraudulent and deceitful manner" to replace the skilled labour of workers and drive down wages by producing inferior goods. Members of the group referred to themselves as Luddites, self-described followers of "Ned Ludd", a legendary weaver whose name was used as a pseudonym in threatening letters to mill owners and government officials.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Manifesto</span> Published declaration of principles and intentions of an individual or group

A manifesto is a written declaration of the intentions, motives, or views of the issuer, be it an individual, group, political party, or government. A manifesto usually accepts a previously published opinion or public consensus or promotes a new idea with prescriptive notions for carrying out changes the author believes should be made. It often is political, social or artistic in nature, sometimes revolutionary, but may present an individual's life stance. Manifestos relating to religious belief are generally referred to as creeds or confessions of faith.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pessimism</span> Negative mental attitude

Pessimism is a mental attitude in which an undesirable outcome is anticipated from a given situation. Pessimists tend to focus on the negatives of life in general. A common question asked to test for pessimism is "Is the glass half empty or half full?"; in this situation, a pessimist is said to see the glass as half empty, or in extreme cases completely empty, while an optimist is said to see the glass as half full. Throughout history, the pessimistic disposition has had effects on all major areas of thinking.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Technology</span> Use of knowledge for practical goals

Technology is the application of conceptual knowledge for achieving practical goals, especially in a reproducible way. The word technology can also mean the products resulting from such efforts, including both tangible tools such as utensils or machines, and intangible ones such as software. Technology plays a critical role in science, engineering, and everyday life.

Anarcho-primitivism, also known as anti-civilization anarchism, is an anarchist critique of civilization that advocates a return to non-civilized ways of life through deindustrialization, abolition of the division of labor or specialization, abandonment of large-scale organization and all technology other than prehistoric technology and the dissolution of agriculture. Anarcho-primitivists critique the origins and alleged progress of the Industrial Revolution and industrial society. According to anarcho-primitivists, the shift from hunter-gatherer to agricultural subsistence during the Neolithic Revolution gave rise to coercion, social alienation, and social stratification.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">John Zerzan</span> American anarchist and primitivist philosopher

John Edward Zerzan is an American anarchist and primitivist author. His works criticize agricultural civilization as inherently oppressive, and advocates drawing upon the ways of life of hunter-gatherers as an inspiration for what a free society should look like. Subjects of his criticism include domestication and symbolic thought.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ned Ludd</span> Fictional figurehead of the Luddites

Ned Ludd is the legendary person to whom the Luddites attributed the name of their movement.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Technophobia</span> Fear or discomfort with advanced technology

Technophobia, also known as technofear, is the fear or dislike of, or discomfort with, advanced technology or complex devices, especially personal computers, smartphones, and tablet computers. Although there are numerous interpretations of technophobia, they become more complex as technology continues to evolve. The term is generally used in the sense of an irrational fear, but others contend fears are justified. It is the opposite of technophilia.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Neil Postman</span> American media theorist and cultural critic (1931–2003)

Neil Postman was an American author, educator, media theorist and cultural critic, who eschewed digital technology, including personal computers, mobile devices, and cruise control in cars, and was critical of uses of technology, such as personal computers in school. He is best known for twenty books regarding technology and education, including Amusing Ourselves to Death (1985), Conscientious Objections (1988), Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology (1992), The Disappearance of Childhood (1982) and The End of Education: Redefining the Value of School (1995).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Technological utopianism</span> Any ideology based on the premise that advances in technology could bring a utopia

Technological utopianism is any ideology based on the premise that advances in science and technology could and should bring about a utopia, or at least help to fulfill one or another utopian ideal.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Jacques Ellul</span> French sociologist, technology critic, and Christian anarchist

Jacques Ellul was a French philosopher, sociologist, lay theologian, and professor. Noted as a Christian anarchist, Ellul was a longtime Professor of History and the Sociology of Institutions on the Faculty of Law and Economic Sciences at the University of Bordeaux. A prolific writer, he authored more than 60 books and more than 600 articles over his lifetime, many of which discussed propaganda, the impact of technology on society, and the interaction between religion and politics.

"Why The Future Doesn't Need Us" is an article written by Bill Joy in the April 2000 issue of Wired magazine. In the article, he argues that "Our most powerful 21st-century technologies—robotics, genetic engineering, and nanotech—are threatening to make humans an endangered species." Joy warns:

The experiences of the atomic scientists clearly show the need to take personal responsibility, the danger that things will move too fast, and the way in which a process can take on a life of its own. We can, as they did, create insurmountable problems in almost no time flat. We must do more thinking up front if we are not to be similarly surprised and shocked by the consequences of our inventions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Kirkpatrick Sale</span> American author (born 1937)

Kirkpatrick Sale is an American author who has written prolifically about political decentralism, environmentalism, luddism and technology. He has been described as having a "philosophy unified by decentralism" and as being "a leader of the Neo-Luddites," an "anti-globalization leftist," and "the theoretician for a new secessionist movement."

Ecofascism is a term used to describe individuals and groups which combine environmentalism with fascism.

Criticism of technology is an analysis of adverse impacts of industrial and digital technologies. It is argued that, in all advanced industrial societies, technology becomes a means of domination, control, and exploitation, or more generally something which threatens the survival of humanity. Some of the technology opposed by the most radical critics may include everyday household products, such as refrigerators, computers, and medication. However, criticism of technology comes in many shades.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ted Kaczynski</span> American domestic terrorist (1942–2023)

Theodore John Kaczynski, also known as the Unabomber, was an American mathematician and domestic terrorist. He was a mathematics prodigy, but abandoned his academic career in 1969 to pursue a primitive lifestyle.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Technology and society</span> Overview of the relationship between technology and society

Technology, society and life or technology and culture refers to the inter-dependency, co-dependence, co-influence, and co-production of technology and society upon one another. Evidence for this synergy has been found since humanity first started using simple tools. The inter-relationship has continued as modern technologies such as the printing press and computers have helped shape society. The first scientific approach to this relationship occurred with the development of tektology, the "science of organization", in early twentieth century Imperial Russia. In modern academia, the interdisciplinary study of the mutual impacts of science, technology, and society, is called science and technology studies.

<i>Industrial Society and Its Future</i> 1995 essay by Ted Kaczynski

Industrial Society and Its Future, also known as the Unabomber Manifesto, is a 1995 anti-technology essay by Ted Kaczynski, the "Unabomber". The manifesto contends that the Industrial Revolution began a harmful process of natural destruction brought about by technology, while forcing humans to adapt to machinery, creating a sociopolitical order that suppresses human freedom and potential. The 35,000-word manifesto formed the ideological foundation of Kaczynski's 1978–1995 mail bomb campaign, designed to protect wilderness by hastening the collapse of industrial society.

<i>Anti-tech Revolution</i> 2016 book by Ted Kaczynski

Anti-Tech Revolution: Why and How is a 2016 non-fiction book by Ted Kaczynski.

<i>Technological Slavery</i> Book by American terrorist Ted Kaczynski

Technological Slavery is a 2008 non-fiction book by American domestic terrorist Theodore John Kaczynski, also known as the Unabomber. In it, Kaczynski continues the critique of modern technological society that he began with his 1995 manifesto, Industrial Society and Its Future. The book serves as a compendium of his thoughts and philosophies on technology, freedom, and the impacts of societal progression on individual autonomy.

References

  1. 1 2 Jones, Steve E. (2006). Against technology: from the Luddites to neo-Luddism. CRC Press. p. 20. ISBN   978-0-415-97868-2.
  2. ↑ Brosnan, M.J. (1998). Technophobia: the psychological impact of Information Technology. pg 155. London: Routledge.
  3. 1 2 Sale, Kirkpatrick (February 1997). "AVOWEDLY LOW-TECH: America's new Luddites". mondediplo.com. Retrieved 14 November 2020.
  4. ↑ Christensen, Karen; David Levinson (2003). Encyclopedia of community: from the village to the virtual world, Volume 3. SAGE. p. 886. ISBN   978-0-7619-2598-9.
  5. 1 2 3 4 5 Basney, Lionel. Questioning Progress, Books and Culture magazine, 1998
  6. ↑ Graham, Gordon (1999). The Internet: a philosophical inquiry. Routledge. p. 9. ISBN   978-0-415-19749-6.
  7. ↑ Huesemann, Michael H., and Joyce A. Huesemann (2011). Technofix: Why Technology Won’t Save Us or the Environment, New Society Publishers, Gabriola Island, British Columbia, Canada, ISBN   0865717044, 464 pp.
  8. 1 2 3 Glendinning, Chellis. Notes towards a Neo-Luddite manifesto . Utne Reader, 1990.
  9. 1 2 3 4 5 Doresa Banning, Modern Day Luddites, 30 November 2001, Archived 7 March 2016 at the Wayback Machine
  10. ↑ Postman, Neil (Winter 1993). "Of Luddites, Learning, and Life". Technos. 2 (4).
  11. ↑ Bell, David (2005). Science, technology and culture. McGraw-Hill International. p. 55. ISBN   978-0-335-21326-9.
  12. ↑ Tom Kington (11 May 2012). "Italian anarchists kneecap nuclear executive and threaten more shootings". The Guardian . Retrieved 13 May 2012.
  13. 1 2 The Washington Post: Unabomber Special Report: Industrial Society and Its Future by Theodore Kaczynski
  14. ↑ Interview with the Luddite, Wired magazine, Issue 3.06, Jun 1995
  15. ↑ Young, Julian. Heidegger's Later Philosophy, p. 80. Cambridge University Press, 2002.
  16. 1 2 3 4 Wheeler, Michael, "Martin Heidegger", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2013 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.)
  17. ↑ Ellul, The Technological Society p. 324
  18. ↑ Lindholdt, Paul (1997). "Luddism and Its Discontents". American Quarterly. 49 (4): 866–873. doi:10.1353/aq.1997.0033. JSTOR   30041816. S2CID   144450752.

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.