Brian Merchant

History of the actual Luddites, arguing that they were far from anti-technology; what they were anti- was exploitation, immiseration, and deskilling, which owners of the new machines were forcing on them. For example, the weekly pay of a Lancashire weaver declined from 25 shillings in 1800 to 14 shillings in 1811. This was connected to the rise in cotton production due to enslavement in America. Weavers demanded that existing laws against abuse be enforced—but the wealthy factory owners who actually had parliamentary representation succeeded instead. Merchant draws a lot of parallels between then and now (gig work and big tech play the role of the factory owners). And, he argues, despite the immediate repression and losses suffered by the Luddites due to the fact that the UK denied most people political representation, they built a foundation for later labor protest and protections. A former head of one of Australia’s largest telecom unions also credited Luddites transported from the UK for Australia’s union tradition.… (mere)

Brian Merchant writes articles for newspapers and magazines; he has been a technology columnist for the Los Angeles Times publishing entity. Blood in Machine (2023) is a book published in print and as an ebook. It explains when and where the Luddite movement was active. He draws on large body of material. The history of the Luddite movement and its suppression have been discussed extensively by economic. social and literary writers and historians in works written and published for two centuries. He largely (re)tells the story of the protest movement early in the 19th century against the introduction of industrial machinery to spin thread and yarn, and weave and process cloth in the West Midlands and Lancastershire in Engand. He focusses on the peaceful complaints and protests against the economic effects of the introduction mechical devices and "factories". He argues that the balance of power between workers and persons investing capital in the making of policy and law and the enforcement of law favoured the monied interests. He illustrates the point by showing that the working classLuddites had sympathy and support from some political and literary figures, but were suppressed brutally.
He argues that the word "Luddite" was and is used, in a pejorative way, to refer to opponents of technical innovation.
He argues the use of information technology in the last 20th and early 21st centuries is as disruptive for workers as the beginning of the Industrial Revolution in Europe. He argues effectively that economic elites, and their advisers, advocates and followers, use information technology to dissolve employment into "relationships" that are poorly paid and onerous for workers.
He tries to make his book more relatable by imagined conversations between historical persons, based on a few 19th and early 20th century works that took that approach. These passages are credited to source works in the many notes which appear in endnotes to most chapters and in the extensive "notes" at the end of the book,… (mere)