@emilypankhurst_ It may be that when producing new machines, workers are needed for it, but at the time the machine is put into operation, it will do all the work that many workers would have to do, so it will leave them without work and without salary to survive.
Historian Eric Hobsbawm saw this machine-wrecking movement as a form of "collective bargaining by rioting," which would be a tactic used in Britain since the Restoration, as the spread of factories across the country made demonstrations on a large scale would be impractical.
Although the origin of the name Luddite is unclear, one popular theory is that the movement was named after Ned Ludd, a young man who allegedly broke two looms in 1779, and whose name became emblematic of machine wreckers.
"The worker will only respect the machine the day it becomes his friend, reducing his work, and not as today, which is his enemy, takes away jobs and kills workers"
Émile Pouget (1860-1931), French anarcho-syndicalist
Good afternoon! I have decided to open a small guided tour of the work areas without machinery so that you can appreciate the traditional way of working and understand how little we need these gadgets in our society... you are all welcome!
Hello! My name is Ludd Jones and I’m going to publish my ideas and those of my people, the Luddites, so you can understand what we manifest, what problems we see that some machines can bring to the development of our employment and what we belive are their solutions to*
I once knew a boy named Ned Ludd who set several textile machines on fire as a response to the repressions that the proletariat was suffering... can you imagine the great suffering that this man had thanks to these textile machines? He gave us a name who today we call Luddites