Analysis Of David Noble Progress Without People: In Defence Of Luddism

In today’s fast paced modern society, there are many individual’s who wish we could turn back time to the where we weren’t surrounded by computers, cell phones and all manners of surveillance and recording. Many say that these things have added a hassle to our lives by being striped away from our own personal privacy and educational learning experiences. However, the evolvement of new technology during the industrial revolution was more then just the loss of privacy and quality education, but the loss of jobs that many blue collared workers relied on. In the English industrial revolution of the 19th century, industries were being revolutionized by new mechanization and organizational techniques which took the place of hand produced work. This

Within this book, we can come to find some arguments that indicate Noble’s true feelings towards the industrial revolution as well as gives reasons as to why he supports luddism. Noble states that “The luddites who resisted the introduction to new technologies were not against technology per se but rather against the social changes that the new technology reflected and reinforced” (Noble, 2015, p. 261). The reason being is because unemployment, the lack of compassion, and the absence of social responsibility were over looked as businesses preferred efficiency rather then quality in order to make more money. In retaliation, the luddites were faced with choices in order to resolve this pandemic. They felt that they would either have to lose their jobs, commit violent acts towards the factory owners who were destroying jobs or to ultimately destroy the equipment itself in order to make it less profitable to throw people out of work. Ultimately they chose property destruction because they believed that “when choosing between machines and people or, more precisely between the capitalist’s machines and their own lives, they had little problem deciding which came first” (Noble, 2015, p. 262). David Noble revealed that the luddites did not destroy machines because of technophobia (afraid of technology), but because

However, before we can make a conclusion of our own, we need to acknowledge the other side of the spectrum. This section will reveal the weaknesses of David Noble’s argument on the notion that workers were being replaced by new technological equipment and they were no longer considered a valuable part of the making of goods and services since, unskilled workers were able to do the same job at a cheaper cost. Lucy Powell, a English politician stated once that “in the industrial revolution Britain led the world in advances that enabled mass production: trade exchanges transportation factory technology and new skills needed for the new industrialized world” (2008, p.1). Basically, mass production allowed for textiles and consumer goods to be sent out to consumers in order for them to be able live a better life. Things that were once not possible for the lower class as well as the middle class were now obtainable all due to the industrial revolution. This opinion goes against what David Noble claimed because, regardless of the new technology that was being presented within various factories and businesses, it allowed for those of a lower class to be able to better their lives. The industrial revolution also allowed for more jobs and skills to be created, which goes against luddism and what Noble stood by. The reason for this