
The Luddite Fallacy - Nition
http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/6717/economics/the-luddite-fallacy/
======
nabla9
>The Luddites were a group of English textile workers who violently destroyed
machines. They broke up power looms because they feared that these new
machines were taking their jobs and livelihoods.

The above is the real Luddite Fallacy.

What the Luddites Really Fought Against
[http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/what-the-luddites-
real...](http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/what-the-luddites-really-
fought-against-264412/)

>Despite their modern reputation, the original Luddites were neither opposed
to technology nor inept at using it. Many were highly skilled machine
operators in the textile industry. Nor was the technology they attacked
particularly new.

>But the Luddites themselves “were totally fine with machines,” says Kevin
Binfield, editor of the 2004 collection Writings of the Luddites. They
confined their attacks to manufacturers who used machines in what they called
“a fraudulent and deceitful manner” to get around standard labor practices.
“They just wanted machines that made high-quality goods,” says Binfield, “and
they wanted these machines to be run by workers who had gone through an
apprenticeship and got paid decent wages. Those were their only concerns.”

There was essentially no wage growth from the beginning of the Industrial
Revolution around 1760 to about 1850 (Engel`s Pause) despite very rapid
technological change and technology adoption in Britain.

What people crying Luddite fallacy forget is that Industrialization was
accompanied with major institutional changes in Britain, weakening the
bargaining power of industrialists. Industrialization as we know it, would
have been impossible without that.

Automation must be accompanied with similar institutional changes today if we
want to avoid unrest and mass unemployment.

~~~
Nition
Thanks for those comments. I thought it was an interesting article but I
partly posted it because I was thought there might be some interesting
rebuttal to be had as well.

