| ▲ | panarky 4 days ago | ||||||||||||||||
Because life would be so much better if people still had to spin wool and weave cloth by hand, and grow their own food by digging in the earth with no tools. Use whatever means necessary to stop powerful people from exploiting you and stealing the fruits of your labor. If that struggle involves monkeywrenching their machines, so be it. But like any tool, the machines themselves can be used for good or evil. Breaking the machines shouldn't be an end in itself. | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | dpc050505 4 days ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
The 700m people suffering from starvation or malnutrition while we produce excess food would probably rather be digging in the earth with no tools if it meant they got fed. The Luddites wouldn't have been destroying machines if they had insurance that they would also benefit from the machines, rather than see their livelihoods being destroyed while the boss made more money than ever. | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | Refreeze5224 4 days ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||
Like the OP, you misunderstand the entire point of the Luddites. Breaking the machines was not an end, it was the tactical means to help illustrate their broader point of how the owning class can arbitrarily ruin their entire lives and livelihoods with absolutely zero recourse or consultation with the impacted people. This is a defining feature of capitalism, and that was their issue. Your strawman about spinning and digging with no tools is just that, and is irrelevant to the core issue of capitalism. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||