fbpx
Wikipedia

Neo-Luddism

March 14, 2023

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 1816.[1]

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.

Neo-Luddism distinguishes itself from the philosophy originally associated with Luddism in that Luddism opposes all forms of technology, whereas neo-Luddism only opposes technology deemed destructive or otherwise detrimental to society.[5][6]

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[7] as models for the future.

Neo-Luddism denies the ability of any new technology to solve current problems, such as environmental degradation,[7] nuclear warfare and biological weapons, without creating more, potentially dangerous problems.[8][9]

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."[10] 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.[10]

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.

Ted Kaczynski predicted a world with a depleted environment, an increase in psychological disorders, with either "leftists" who aim to control humanity through technology, or technology directly controlling humanity.[11] According to Sale, "The industrial civilization so well served by its potent technologies cannot last, and will not last; its collapse is certain within not more than a few decades."[12] Stephen Hawking, a famous astrophysicist, predicted that the means of production will be controlled by the "machine owner" class and that without redistribution of wealth, technology will create more economic inequality.[13]

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.[7][14]

Types of intervention

In 1990, attempting to reclaim the term 'Luddite' and found a unified movement, Chellis 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).[10] She argues in favor of the "search for new technological forms" which are local in scale and promote social and political freedom.

 
Kaczynski as a young professor at U.C. Berkeley, 1968

In "The coming revolution", Kaczynski outlined what he saw as changes humanity will have to make in order to make society functional, "new values that will free them from the yoke of the present technoindustrial system", including:

  • Rejection of all modern technology – "This is logically necessary, because modern technology is a whole in which all parts are interconnected; you can't get rid of the bad parts without also giving up those parts that seem good."
  • Rejection of civilization itself
  • Rejection of materialism and its replacement with a conception of life that values moderation and self-sufficiency while deprecating the acquisition of property or of status.
  • Love and reverence toward nature or even worship of nature
  • Exaltation of freedom
  • Punishment of those responsible for the present situation. "Scientists, engineers, corporation executives, politicians, and so forth to make the cost of improving technology too great for anyone to try"

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."[12] 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!).[12]

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 to bring together critics of technology and globalization.[12] The two figures who are seen as the movement's founders are Chellis 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.[7][12] Postman, however, did not consider himself a Luddite.[15]

Relationship to violence and vandalism

Some neo-Luddites use vandalism and or violence to achieve social change and promote their cause.[16]

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.[17]

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,[11] 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.[18] 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.[12]

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.[19] However, the later Heidegger did not see technology as wholly negative and did not call for its abandonment or destruction.[20] 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.[20] 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.[20] 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.[20]

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 which "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."[21] In Industrial Revolution England machines became cheaper to use than to employee men. The five counties of Yorkshire, Lancashire, Cheshire, Derbyshire, and Nottinghamshire had a small uprising where they threatened those hired to guard the machines.[22] 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."[11] Other philosophers of technology who have questioned the validity of technological progress include Albert Borgmann, Don Ihde and Hubert Dreyfus.[7]

See also

References

  1. ^ a b 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. ^ a b 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. ^ Glendinning, Chellis (1990). "Notes toward a Neo-Luddite Manifesto". The Anarchist Library. Retrieved 4 February 2022.
  6. ^ Kiberd, Roisin (28 January 2015). "Burn It All Down: A Guide to Neo-Luddism". Gizmodo. Retrieved 4 February 2022.
  7. ^ a b c d e Basney, Lionel. Questioning Progress, Books and Culture magazine, 1998
  8. ^ Graham, Gordon (1999). The Internet: a philosophical inquiry. Routledge. p. 9. ISBN 978-0-415-19749-6.
  9. ^ 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.
  10. ^ a b c Glendinning, Chellis. Notes towards a Neo-Luddite manifesto. Utne Reader, 1990.
  11. ^ a b c The Washington Post: Unabomber Special Report: Industrial Society and Its Future by Theodore Kaczynski
  12. ^ a b c d e f Doresa Banning, Modern Day Luddites, 30 November 2001, [1] 7 March 2016 at the Wayback Machine
  13. ^ Stephen Hawking Says We Should Really, 2016
  14. ^ Theodore J. Kaczynski, David Skrbina; Technological Slavery, The Collected Writings of Theodore J. Kaczynski, a.k.a. "The Unabomber."
  15. ^ Postman, Neil (Winter 1993). "Of Luddites, Learning, and Life". Technos. 2 (4).
  16. ^ Bell, David (2005). Science, technology and culture. McGraw-Hill International. p. 55. ISBN 978-0-335-21326-9.
  17. ^ Tom Kington (11 May 2012). "Italian anarchists kneecap nuclear executive and threaten more shootings". The Guardian. Retrieved 13 May 2012.
  18. ^ Interview with the Luddite, Wired magazine, Issue 3.06, Jun 1995
  19. ^ Young, Julian. Heidegger's Later Philosophy, p. 80. Cambridge University Press, 2002.
  20. ^ a b c d Wheeler, Michael, "Martin Heidegger", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2013 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.)
  21. ^ Ellul, The Technological Society p. 324
  22. ^ 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

  • Huesemann, M.H., and J.A. Huesemann (2011). Technofix: Why Technology Won’t Save Us or the Environment, New Society Publishers, Gabriola Island, Canada, ISBN 0865717044.
  • Kaczynski, Theodore (2010) Technological Slavery Feral House.
  • Marshall, Alan (2016) Ecotopia 2121: Our Future Green Utopia, Arcade Publ, New York, ISBN 9781628726008
  • Postman, Neil (1992) Technopoly: the Surrender of Culture to Technology Knopf, New York, ISBN 0-394-58272-1
  • Pynchon, Thomas (28 October 1984). "Is It O.K. To Be A Luddite?". The New York Times.
  • Quigley, Peter (1998) Coyote in the Maze: Tracking Edward Abbey in a World of Words University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, ISBN 0-87480-563-5
  • Roszak, Theodore (1994) The Cult of Information: A Neo-Luddite Treatise on High-Tech, Artificial Intelligence, and the True Art of Thinking (2nd ed.) University of California Press, Berkeley, California, ISBN 0-520-08584-1
  • Sale, Kirkpatrick (1996) Rebels Against The Future: The Luddites And Their War On The Industrial Revolution: Lessons For The Computer Age Basic Books, ISBN 978-0-201-40718-1
  • Tenner, Edward (1996) Why Things Bite Back: Technology and the Revenge of Unintended Consequences Knopf, New York, ISBN 0-679-42563-2
  • Mueller, Gavin (2021) Breaking Things at Work: The Luddites Are Right About Why You Hate Your Job; ASIN: B07ZN3MFL4

External links

  • Stand up against the anti-technology terrorists by Gerardo Herrera Corral, Nature 476, 373 (2011)
  • Rage Against the Machines

March 14, 2023
luddism, luddism, philosophy, opposing, many, forms, modern, technology, term, luddite, generally, used, pejorative, applied, people, showing, technophobic, leanings, name, based, historical, legacy, english, luddites, were, active, between, 1811, 1816, leader. 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 1816 1 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 Neo Luddism distinguishes itself from the philosophy originally associated with Luddism in that Luddism opposes all forms of technology whereas neo Luddism only opposes technology deemed destructive or otherwise detrimental to society 5 6 Contents 1 Philosophy 1 1 Vision of the future without intervention 1 2 Types of intervention 2 Movement 2 1 Relationship to violence and vandalism 3 History 3 1 Origins of contemporary critiques of technology in literature 4 See also 5 References 6 Further reading 7 External linksPhilosophy EditNeo 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 7 as models for the future Neo Luddism denies the ability of any new technology to solve current problems such as environmental degradation 7 nuclear warfare and biological weapons without creating more potentially dangerous problems 8 9 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 10 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 10 Vision of the future without intervention Edit 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 Ted Kaczynski predicted a world with a depleted environment an increase in psychological disorders with either leftists who aim to control humanity through technology or technology directly controlling humanity 11 According to Sale The industrial civilization so well served by its potent technologies cannot last and will not last its collapse is certain within not more than a few decades 12 Stephen Hawking a famous astrophysicist predicted that the means of production will be controlled by the machine owner class and that without redistribution of wealth technology will create more economic inequality 13 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 7 14 Types of intervention Edit In 1990 attempting to reclaim the term Luddite and found a unified movement Chellis 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 10 She argues in favor of the search for new technological forms which are local in scale and promote social and political freedom Kaczynski as a young professor at U C Berkeley 1968 In The coming revolution Kaczynski outlined what he saw as changes humanity will have to make in order to make society functional new values that will free them from the yoke of the present technoindustrial system including Rejection of all modern technology This is logically necessary because modern technology is a whole in which all parts are interconnected you can t get rid of the bad parts without also giving up those parts that seem good Rejection of civilization itself Rejection of materialism and its replacement with a conception of life that values moderation and self sufficiency while deprecating the acquisition of property or of status Love and reverence toward nature or even worship of nature Exaltation of freedom Punishment of those responsible for the present situation Scientists engineers corporation executives politicians and so forth to make the cost of improving technology too great for anyone to try Movement EditContemporary 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 12 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 12 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 to bring together critics of technology and globalization 12 The two figures who are seen as the movement s founders are Chellis 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 7 12 Postman however did not consider himself a Luddite 15 Relationship to violence and vandalism Edit Some neo Luddites use vandalism and or violence to achieve social change and promote their cause 16 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 17 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 11 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 18 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 12 History EditOrigins of contemporary critiques of technology in literature Edit 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 19 However the later Heidegger did not see technology as wholly negative and did not call for its abandonment or destruction 20 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 20 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 20 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 20 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 which 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 21 In Industrial Revolution England machines became cheaper to use than to employee men The five counties of Yorkshire Lancashire Cheshire Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire had a small uprising where they threatened those hired to guard the machines 22 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 11 Other philosophers of technology who have questioned the validity of technological progress include Albert Borgmann Don Ihde and Hubert Dreyfus 7 See also EditNeo Luddites category Ned Ludd Anarcho primitivism Antiscience Butlerian Jihad Green conservatism CLODO Development criticism Earth liberation Green anarchy Hardline subculture John Zerzan MOVE Pentti Linkola Radical environmentalism Reactionary On the Origin of the Influencing Machine in Schizophrenia Traditionalist Workers Party Technological Singularity Why The Future Doesn t Need Us by Bill Joy published in WiredReferences Edit a b Jones Steve E 2006 Against technology from the Luddites to neo Luddism CRC Press p 20 ISBN 978 0 415 97868 2 Brosnan M J 1998 Technophobia the psychological impact of Information Technology pg 155 London Routledge a b Sale Kirkpatrick February 1997 AVOWEDLY LOW TECH America s new Luddites mondediplo com Retrieved 14 November 2020 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 Glendinning Chellis 1990 Notes toward a Neo Luddite Manifesto The Anarchist Library Retrieved 4 February 2022 Kiberd Roisin 28 January 2015 Burn It All Down A Guide to Neo Luddism Gizmodo Retrieved 4 February 2022 a b c d e Basney Lionel Questioning Progress Books and Culture magazine 1998 Graham Gordon 1999 The Internet a philosophical inquiry Routledge p 9 ISBN 978 0 415 19749 6 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 a b c Glendinning Chellis Notes towards a Neo Luddite manifesto Utne Reader 1990 a b c The Washington Post Unabomber Special Report Industrial Society and Its Future by Theodore Kaczynski a b c d e f Doresa Banning Modern Day Luddites 30 November 2001 1 Archived 7 March 2016 at the Wayback Machine Stephen Hawking Says We Should Really 2016 Theodore J Kaczynski David Skrbina Technological Slavery The Collected Writings of Theodore J Kaczynski a k a The Unabomber Postman Neil Winter 1993 Of Luddites Learning and Life Technos 2 4 Bell David 2005 Science technology and culture McGraw Hill International p 55 ISBN 978 0 335 21326 9 Tom Kington 11 May 2012 Italian anarchists kneecap nuclear executive and threaten more shootings The Guardian Retrieved 13 May 2012 Interview with the Luddite Wired magazine Issue 3 06 Jun 1995 Young Julian Heidegger s Later Philosophy p 80 Cambridge University Press 2002 a b c d Wheeler Michael Martin Heidegger The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Spring 2013 Edition Edward N Zalta ed Ellul The Technological Society p 324 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 EditHuesemann M H and J A Huesemann 2011 Technofix Why Technology Won t Save Us or the Environment New Society Publishers Gabriola Island Canada ISBN 0865717044 Kaczynski Theodore 2010 Technological Slavery Feral House Marshall Alan 2016 Ecotopia 2121 Our Future Green Utopia Arcade Publ New York ISBN 9781628726008 Postman Neil 1992 Technopoly the Surrender of Culture to Technology Knopf New York ISBN 0 394 58272 1 Pynchon Thomas 28 October 1984 Is It O K To Be A Luddite The New York Times Quigley Peter 1998 Coyote in the Maze Tracking Edward Abbey in a World of Words University of Utah Press Salt Lake City ISBN 0 87480 563 5 Roszak Theodore 1994 The Cult of Information A Neo Luddite Treatise on High Tech Artificial Intelligence and the True Art of Thinking 2nd ed University of California Press Berkeley California ISBN 0 520 08584 1 Sale Kirkpatrick 1996 Rebels Against The Future The Luddites And Their War On The Industrial Revolution Lessons For The Computer Age Basic Books ISBN 978 0 201 40718 1 Tenner Edward 1996 Why Things Bite Back Technology and the Revenge of Unintended Consequences Knopf New York ISBN 0 679 42563 2 Mueller Gavin 2021 Breaking Things at Work The Luddites Are Right About Why You Hate Your Job ASIN B07ZN3MFL4External links EditPrimitivism writings archive Luddism and the Neo Luddite Reaction by Martin Ryder University of Colorado at Denver School of Education Stand up against the anti technology terrorists by Gerardo Herrera Corral Nature 476 373 2011 Rage Against the Machines Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title Neo Luddism amp oldid 1135564415, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,

article

, read, download, free, free download, mp3, video, mp4, 3gp, jpg, jpeg, gif, png, picture, music, song, movie, book, game, games.