Digital Luddites seek to democratize technology, rooted in historical critiques of its oppressive use. The original Luddites opposed mechanization that devalued labor, and their legacy informs current resistance to corporate digital control. Modern digital Luddism implements strategies of resistance, removal, and replacement to advocate for equitable technology practices.
Digital Luddites, a modern movement, aim to democratize technology rather than oppose it. Historically mistaken as anti-progress, the 19th century Luddites fought against the oppressive utilization of technology that threatened their livelihoods. Their core belief was that technology should serve the many, not just the privileged, a notion that rings true today amid growing corporate control over digital resources.
The original Luddites were English textile workers reacting against machines that undermined their craft and job security. Their methods, dubbed “collective bargaining by riot,” highlighted their fight against centralized power that devalued their labor. This resistance was part of larger labor rights movements, echoing earlier revolts like the Diggers and Levellers in England who resisted land privatization.
Despite facing severe consequences, including imprisonment, the spirit of Luddism persists. Modern-day critics of Big Tech, often dismissed as Luddites, should not be conflated with those merely fearing change. Historical precedents show that unchecked corporate power can enable horrific abuses, exemplified by IBM’s role in Nazi Germany and other corporations profiting from oppression. Today, digital technologies exacerbate inequalities and threaten democratic values, necessitating a renewed Luddite critique.
Digital Luddism, or neo-Luddism, employs three strategies: resistance, removal, and replacement. The goal is to ensure technology aligns with democratic values. “Resistance” emphasizes the importance of collective action against harmful technologies, exemplified by Google workers protesting military contracts and the exposure of Facebook’s harmful algorithms by whistleblower Frances Haugen.
The “Removal” strategy focuses on dismantling entrenched corporate power via political action and public pressure. Initiatives like the TraffickingHub petition highlight accountability for unethical companies, while the EU’s 2023 Digital Markets Act reduced Apple’s app store monopoly, encouraging smaller developers. Despite challenges, ongoing legal actions show a push against corporate overreach.
“Replacement” involves developing ethical alternatives to proprietary technologies. This systemic change favors sustainable, transparent, and user-controlled infrastructures instead of merely substituting tools. For instance, after Elon Musk’s acquisition of Twitter, decentralized platforms like Bluesky experienced significant user growth. Policies around data rights and open data standards are emerging from governments, reflecting public demand for platform independence.
Ultimately, digital Luddism recognizes that sabotaging hardware is impractical in today’s digital landscape. Instead, it focuses on dismantling oppressive systems to create a technology landscape that is equitable and just for all.
Original Source: theconversation.com
