David F. Noble draws valuable parallels between our era of burgeoning technology and the technological advances of the industrial revolution.
Proponents of technology during both eras, says Noble, argued that technological advancement was an essential, unstoppable force that would be inherently beneficial to humanity.
Noble's counter-argument looks at the human costs of unchecked technological growth, along the way re-examining and redefining the meaning of Luddism.
Noble stands in “defence of Luddism” and moves accusations of irrationalism to “the religion of technology” on which modern society is supposedly based. According to him, “in the wake of five decades of information revolution, people are now working longer hours, under worsening conditions, with greater anxiety and stress, less skills, less security, less power, less benefits, and less pay. Information technology has clearly been developed and used during these years to deskill, discipline, and displace human labour in a global speed-up of unprecedented proportions (Noble 1995: XI).”
According to David F. Noble (1995: 3-23) the Luddites did not destroy machines because of technophobia, but because of necessity; because they were consciously trying to shape the implementation of new technologies, needing to slow the destruction of older economic relations until people could adjust to newer ones.
They had to choose between starvation, violence against the capitalists, or property destruction. The last choice was the most moderate way to protest against unemployment and the lack of compassion of the factory owners. His book ‘Progress Without People’ revolves around the theme that technology is an evil plot by the ‘capitalist class’ to oppress workers.
Addtitionally, the Luddites did not object to the use of high speed, high-efficiency machines, they objected to the unemployment, the lack of