💾 Archived View for josias.dev › gemlog › industry.gmi captured on 2024-08-31 at 12:01:14. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Thoughts on Industry

This is a short essay I wrote today in a Matrix room currently called "Arising to Lasagna" while discussing Industrial Revolution. I'm publishing it here so more like-minded people can potentially enjoy it.

The Industrial Revolution occurred as a result of various socioeconomic factors including the adoptions of steam-powered technologies and the centralization of production into the hands of a bourgeois class (capitalism). Different social movements have different perspectives on this shift and its implications for societal development.

The communists of the late 1800s saw capitalist production as the current stage of human evolution, pulling us out of feudalism and creating new class antagonisms. They believed that the next step would be state-controlled production, which would lead to the eventual dissolution of the state in favor of worker-run production. According to them, a socialist revolution was inevitable due to the uncontrollable course of history. Gradually workers would become conscious of their class and overthrow their masters. This view was not universal among socialists.

Communists often saw industrialization as a positive force, but one that should be harassed by the working class rather than the owning class. This is represented well in the works of Marx and Engels, as well as anarchist communists such as Peter Kropotkin. The workers would seize the means of production, and own the results of that production rather than having it taken by capitalists.

Others throughout history have viewed industrialization as a blight upon humanity for various reasons. Some brought up moralist objections, as can be seen today with complaints about how modern technologies such as the Internet are making people less sociable. Others brought up practical objections, questioning the possibility of beneficial usage of technology designed for exploitation.

One of these technology-skeptical groups was the Luddites who worked the textile mills in England during the early 19th century. As workshops became increasingly mechanized, manufacturers turned to factory machines to replace jobs and decrease the cost of commodity production. This caused many workers to lose access to work and their livelihoods. In response, the Luddites destroyed machinery used to exclude them from the workforce. They did not necessarily oppose technology, but instead opposed the usage of it at the expense rather than support of workers.

Another branch of thought regarding industrialization is the post-civ movement. They often see industrial collapse as likely due to ecological or internal economic factors, and prepare for a world in which mass production has become impractical or obsolete. Ecology is of primal importance in many post-civ philosophies, and a return to a reciprocal relationship with the land is regularly cited as an important motivation.

As mentioned, there are a variety of viewpoints regarding the societal implications of the Industrial Revolution. Some see it as a factor that only needs control by the right people, others who believe technology needs to be fundamentally rethought, and those who believe that its collapse is inevitable and work for survival in the meantime. These are not mutually exclusive ideas, but this summary provides a dim insight into the historical and present views of differing social movements.

My personal view on industry is a combination of the above. I believe workers should control the results of their labor, but I also believe the current economic system is unsalvagable. Trying to redirect it is trying to mount and steer a charging bull. It's a vain pursuit that will likely lead to self-destruction. Trying harder to tame the bull won't work (sorry communists), instead production as a whole should be rethought and rebuilt to restore harmony with each other and our environment.

~ Josias, 2022-08-22 (CC-BY-SA 4.0)