💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › uncfc-luddite-goals-and-principles.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 14:28:05. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
➡️ Next capture (2024-07-09)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Title: Luddite Goals and Principles Author: UNCFC Date: 27 September 2014 Language: en Topics: luddism, luddite, anti-civilization, anti-technology, technology, ecology, deep ecology Source: [[http://uncfc.org/uploads/goals-and-principles-20140927.pdf]] Notes: This is an old text produced by https://www.wildwill.net/blog/2018/06/20/unc-freedom-club-propaganda-2013-2014/.
ways of life that hold wildness as a central value operate in unity with
larger wild processes; and as creatures with bodies and a biology, we
have adapted to life within wild nature.
wildness; the technological way of life based in these values disrupts
and disregards wild processes to the point of potentially destroying
them; and because of the fast-paced and artificial nature of industrial
society, the industrial way of life forces the wild ecosphere to operate
under conditions radically different from those it is adapted to.
industrial system.
The most alive is the wildest.
—Henry David Thoreau
Luddites do not revere nature, they revere wild nature. Artificial
systems are natural in that they are as subject to the laws of nature as
anything else, but they are not wild because they intentionally narrow
the scope of possibilities within a natural system in order to achieve
some efficient end. Wild processes, on the other hand, operate from base
needs rather than restricting them.
Everywhere we remain unfree and chained to technology...
—Martin Heidegger
Individual technologies or techniques are methods by which an object in
the wild world is limited in order to increase efficiency for a given
end. For example, a human who sharpens the end point of a stick to more
efficiently hunt has utilized technique. Most technologies before the
Industrial Revolution were these kinds of small-scale technologies,
which can be created and maintained by an individual or small group.
These sorts of technologies may make up an artificial system, but they
are not artificial systems themselves. Therefore, they can operate
within wild nature without interfering with its overall stability.
However, since the Industrial Revolution, most new technologies are
organization-dependent technologies, which are both produced by and
exist as artificial systems. Organization-dependent technologies depend
on already-existing infrastructure and complex systems in order to
exist. Roman aqueducts were an example of organization-dependent
technology.
The whole trend in technology has been to devise machines that are less
and less under direct control and more and more seem to have the
beginning of a will of their own.
—Issac Asimov
Taken together, organization-dependent technologies form a technological
system that develops certain intrinsic qualities. Among these qualities
is efficiency and autonomy from wild processes (through artificiality).
This technological system is substantially different from simple,
small-scale techniques because it operates autonomously from any one
person or group. This happens partly because of the way technological
systems distribute responsibility and partly because of the way
technological progress is enforced through necessity.
In technological systems, like the modern industrial system, no one
person or group cannot easily be held responsible for a technological
problem because the technology itself operates autonomously of human
control. For example, who will be responsible when an algorithm in an
autonomous vehicle kills someone—the programmers, the producer, the car
insurance company, the person behind the wheel, or some other entity?
And who is responsible when a dam breaks and floods a nearby city—the
creators of the dam, the engineers who came up with the technology, or
the governments who funded its creation?
Oftentimes it is so difficult to assign responsibility for an event
because all or most of the involved parties were compelled by necessity
or obligation rather than choice. This is called the technological
imperative. In other words, we have become so dependent on the
technological system that we are obligated to concern ourselves not with
the need for food or warmth or mobility, but with oil and energy and
manufacturing. The interest is in providing for the technological system
itself; the potential human risks are viewed as less important.
Lastly, technological autonomy is produced by a phenomenon called
technological somnambulism, or indifferent attitudes toward technology.
Somnambulism is the result of the technological system forming the world
around us. We therefore walk through this world of roads and electricity
and computers with a sort of obliviousness, as though we were
sleepwalking.
It is undeniable that certain modern technologies are appealing for
various reasons. Industrial medicine, for example, is able to cure a
large amount of diseases, and losing it would not be an easy thing to
accept. However, it is important to note that the good parts of
technology cannot be separated from the bad parts. Industrial medicine
may be the key to curing cancer, but it is also the product of the
system that is the primary cause of cancer. Similarly, you can’t have
industrial medicine without the techniques of advertising and
propaganda, advanced communication systems (for scientific research),
and so forth. Therefore, you can only get rid of the entire
technological system, not just the bad parts.
With coal gone, oil gone, high-grade metallic ores gone, no species
however competent can make the long climb from primitive conditions to
high-level technology.
—Sir Fred Hoyle
Industrial society is unique in that it has globalized the world. This
makes it a particularly dangerous threat, since its destruction and
domination is not contained to a single geographic area. Rather, it
threatens the entire biosphere and, should something go wrong, it could
easily eradicate all complex life on earth.
But industrial society is also unique in that it is a technological
society that can be destroyed and not rebuilt. Egypt or Rome were
products of their particular geography, time-period, and culture, but
civilizations like them could easily be built again in a non-industrial
context. However, industrial society is a one-time experiment because it
depends on certain physical prerequisites that can no longer exist
without already- existing infrastructure in place. For example, surface
coal has been depleted, as has easily accessible oil, which means that
now coal and oil are only accessible through machines that themselves
rely on coal and oil. Therefore, if this delicate mechanism were stopped
for long enough, the entire system would begin falling in on itself. It
is likely that threats to these infrastructures will occur at some point
from impending ecological and economic turmoil.
“Revolution” is not a term to throw around as though it means nothing.
Revolutions are often chaotic affairs with unfortunate elements.
However, there are certain times in history when revolutions are the
best option, and this is one of those times. Climate change, mass
surveillance, rapidly spreading diseases, mass extinctions and other
global problems testify to the incredible overreach of the technological
system, and it won’t be long until one of those ticking time-bombs goes
off, leaving room for Luddites to make a radical change. So if you are a
person placed on the side of wild nature, the time to organize is now.
3 (2011): 187–193.
Ideal” (2009).
technological society. Vintage books New York, 1964.
civilization.” Thirty Theses (2006).
http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/jason-godesky-thirty-theses
.
Wildness.” PhD diss., University of North Texas, 2004.
Technology, and other Essays.” New York & London: Harper and Row
Publications (1977): 152–156.
theme in political thought. Mit Press, 1977.