Should We Be Luddites?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 19 июн 2024
- The pursuit of a better future involves questioning the very foundations of our current society, including the forms of technology that uphold it. In today's video essay, we explore Ivan Illich's philosophy and concept of an "overgrowth of tools," and the need to develop new tools of conviviality, transform existing ones, and even discard some altogether.
Thumbnail art by Max Ernst.
Social Revolution: • How To Start A Revolution
The Commons: • The REAL Tragedy of th...
Library Economy: • We Need A Library Economy
Thanks @Anark for voicing the quotes!
Introduction - 0:00
Exploring Our Tools - 1:43
The Overgrowth of Tools & Its Consequences - 7:35
Tools For Conviviality - 11:04
Defining A Convivial Society - 15:38
Criticisms - 20:00
Illich's Impact - 23:28
Outro - 26:02
Support me on Patreon!
/ saintdrew
=
outro music: Cedar Womb by joe zempel
RUclips: / @joezempel
Spotify: open.spotify.com/artist/3vVDn...
=
Sources & Resources:
Convivialism: A Philosophical Manifesto by Raymond D. Boisvert - www.jstor.org/stable/10.5406/...
Tools for Conviviality by Ivan Illich
Innovation without growth: Frameworks for understanding technological change in a post-growth era by Mario Pansera and Mariano Fressoli - journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1...
Tools for degrowth? Ivan Illich's critique of technology revisited - degrowth.info/en/library/tool...
Convivialist Manifesto - www.gcr21.org/publications/gc...
Imo, total accessibility and distribution of knowledge isn't so much about doing everything yourself, but making it more likely that one of your friends of members of your community can repair your laptop, fill complex paperwork, grow delicious apples, or build a house. It's the community as a unit that needs to be able to do most everything they are reliant on.
No human is an island indeed
I guess it's when things are out of sight that the issues occur in your example. When things become less local, how do you make the conscious decision as a community to forego things, or try to enforce change? Repairing your laptop is a good example. Who is being exploited in the assembly of parts, which resources drained and ecology spoiled? Who is dying in order to serve you the internet (and component parts) that's being used to distribute and store your knowledge? What I'm saying is that I don't think the freedom of knowledge (sharing) can come without freedom itself.
Just another perspective ~ Some knowledge, in whatever system, probably still need classification or clearance. Extremes like nuclear weapons require more rare resources and industrial powers, but with AI some kinds of weapons and terrorism become more accessible. The predicament is legislating and enforcing safe practices and failsafes while not becoming dystopian or totalitarian with surveillance.
@@ricos1497these are my thoughts, I don't see (current style) laptops being available under a fair and humane society due to the complexity of the construction. I can imagine a rugged personal device which can be fixed using materials only available within local regions. It makes me think that to maintain global supply chains to provide such items to more than a few people, we'd need a global economy which would require subjagating govts and a strict global order. In small scale sufficient societies I wouldn't have a laptop (and I probably wouldn't have a lower life quality due to this).
Medical treatment is an interesting consideration in this vein, it might be lower quality.
If people with these skills didn’t have to obsess over monetizing, they can do it as a way to connect with their community. The issue is absolutely capitalism
Social media is another good example of overgrowth. What should be a tool to communicate and spread ideas has instead turned into something which feeds our delusions, shortens our attention spans, and degrades our perception of the world.
🤡🤡🤡
Yes, I agree. Social media has become a pseudo-social medium.
There's a difference between communications and identity media. Social media platforms are designed to exploit the urge to create and manage an identity. Inauthenticity and broad manipulation is now celebrated. The elders would have called it putting on airs. Now, we call it networking.
They designed it to be addictive. Also consider that the Internet is still a pretty new thing so I'm sure in the future we will make reforms and use it more responsibly. Maybe.
@@Ouranos369I bet Lucy loves playing football with you. Come here, Charlie Brown, I have a beach house in Idaho I'd love to sell you.
in the city where i live, we have a musical instrument lending library. you buy a yearly membership and can take out 2 instruments at a time as many times as you like. tons of musicians here started out with an instrument from there and its an incredible pillar in our local music scene. local bands and venues hold fundraisers for it and it provides our musicians with communal access to whatever we might need. i would love to see more places like this around the world
That is an amazing idea! 0__0
similar to this, I've always wanted a "library" for items I want to use but have no reason to buy myself. wood working tools, sewing machines, craft supplies, there's so much we could share and save money on. it's not good for "business" but it'd be great for people
That's SO SO cool!
Wow that is so cool! Especially with how expensive instruments are. We need more libraries such as that
My niece checks out instruments along with her friends and they all play together. Library also loans out a telescope
I don't think that specialization should be feared. Yes, OVER-specialization means that only a few people may have the knowledge of how to do something... but for centuries we have relied on specialized skills - from smiths to farmers to ranchers to cooks. I feel that a society is best with accessible specialization. As someone who spins wool into yarn, it isn't a difficult skill to initially learn, but it takes a while to get good enough to use it for textiles. By leaning on a certain level of specialization, we don't have to learn ALL the skills, but a few, and trust that others in the community will learn what we aren't as good at.
Agreed. I believe the concept of "accessible specialisation" is a great term to describe what we should be moving towards.
Yeah, specialization is how you get people contributing code to open source code bases or making schematics and testing electronics for free for large portions of their lives
I think what's important with regard to specialism, too, is specialism to the exclusion of all else. Thus, I do think that smiths and farmers are, as they would be today, too specialised. In that, that specialism is given to them as their sole role. As an amateur woodworker, I can also indulge in blade making of sorts, and these skills shouldn't be siloed to avoid the problems of existing society.
The argument might be that "Dave loves being at the forge, it's his true passion, and he wants to make forks for people". But when does that cross over to "there's daft Dave working all day at the chicken factory. Cleaning their shite off the floor. Loves being of use does Dave"?
I think multi discipline is the future when it comes to our needs, if we're trying to avoid exploitation. For me, specialisation tends towards exploitation, naturally.
That's not to say that someone can't be the best damned fork maker in town of course. Just that we can never expect that of them, and that cannot come to define them. Perhaps that's it in a nutshell: a world where we're not defined by our labour.
@@ricos1497 While I do like Heinlein's concept of the "Competent Man" as an aspirational figure, it is ultimately not realistic. As the complexity of technology increases, the need for specialization of knowledge and skill also increases. Basic life skills are something that everyone should have to the best of their ability, but there is only so much time in a day, and simple biological and neurological realities put limits on what many of us are able to do.
Ultimately, in a "utopian" future, I see room for hyper-specialist and hyper-generalist roles, as well as the entire spectrum in between.
@@EphemeralTao For that utopian future, that's kinda what automation was MEANT to solve. hyper-specialise in creating machines -> automated machines do for you what not able to do yourself. The problem is, to automate something you need to understand it enough yourself or get the help of someone who does so that it doesn't cause unexpected problems. That someone might not help create something that might make them unneeded in the future. So, the utopian specialist ends up needing to become more generalist, then it all repeats.
I see the old tradition of having other RUclipsrs nonchalantly show up to read text passages is still going strong! :)
this kind of thing is really really common when it comes to computers, to the extent that relatively few people actually know how they work; most programmers and users are so far removed from the machine itself that they build massive (metaphorical) jenga towers of dependencies, overhead and complication. it’s become something of an issue
well, there is little ongoig chapter in my lifestory where I like to hack on open source (gpl2) video editor cinelerra-gg, so when we lost our real developer who died in road accident I become de facto most capable code wrangler among remaining users .. we still do our thing, but sadly even small amount of intuition I developed when it come to complex c++ codebase is not easily propogatable to more user-like users ... yes, we are all on Linux.
Also, after 20 years of rocking in this Linux boat (mostly Slackware, since 2005) it feels a bit of ... dud? Major corporate players easily control the field and mindspace of developers ... even if those developers work for (weaker) open source or (stronger) libre software ...
I agree. Another problem though is that lots of the computer tools were actually built by people who didn't quite understand it either. And are therefore vunerable. Or programmers were just put under way too much pressure to deliver, meaning not enough testing was done and vunerable not quite properly working tools are delivered.. And I agree, it does seem to build into a Jenga style structure.. Too complex for most people, and still held together with duct tape..
I think there's an xkcd comic about this
@@AndrewismHmm, why doesn't that surprise me 😅
it's almost as if workers are more and more alienated from the things they work on
creating a society that feels like their whole life is meaningless, as if they were thought to perceive the human being as being worthless
if only someone had warn us this was happening
technology is a force multiplier depending on how it is used it has the potential to do good or bad things. but in this hierarchical system they are used to benefit the few at the top at the expense of the many. change society and you change how technology is used. great video
All new advances in tech (from the plow to AI) start with the promise of democratization because they break whatever the current paradigm is, then eventually the group that exploits it the most has an advantage, forcing others to join or become irrelevant or effectively extinct. That's what happened with RUclips too. First, YT had promise because anyone could make a video and post it online, bypassing the standard of television and broadcasting at the time. However, as it became more popular, it became harder to have your voice hears among the millions of viewers. Eventually, the businesses that had capital leveraged that and became influential again as RUclips tailored the algorithm to favor a certain kind of content that makes RUclips and it's advertising partners money. It's like that with all social media. I don't know what the next paradigm shift will be, but it will likely follow the same formula. First, democratizing. Then, authoritarian or otherwise oppressive. The ultimate question is whether it is possible for an ideology to be both dominant and democratic, resilient to change yet soft at heart.
Poorly worded but hopefully some of that connects.
Beautifully said
I get what you're saying, I suppose the question is to what extent we can interrupt that cycle through system change and consciously anti-hierarchical organisation
RUclips was initially democratic in terms of self-expression, but it was undemocratic in terms of ownership and profit. Initially all the revenue went to RUclips and none of it went to creators. Over time the creators became more expert and organized, and their share of revenue started to increase. Eventually they'll form a labour union and will be able to negotiate even higher share of revenue. In that sense, RUclips is becoming more democratic with time. But I definitely agree with you that it's becoming less democratic in terms of how much control creators and viewers have over what they can create and what they can watch respectively
RUclips was ALWAYS a capitalist enterprise. This platform was never intended to be democratic.
More people came, more time needed to be split between more people, and now it’s harder to find people that you like. It’s not hard to see why that is. Common sense really.
I would not be able to live properly without the Industrial Revolution's technologies.
I'm glad more people are talking about technology as part of ourselves.
technology is not separate from us it's a part of who we are our society, our culture, our bodies, and we should regard it as such
we have to recognise that the Industrial world is a web of interdependent systems you cannot build railways, wind turbines or surgical tools without systems to obtain and process the necessary materials.
we should not fall into the trap of obsession over which technologies are "good" or "bad" a cycle path cannot do the job of a high-speed railway and vice versa.
our technologies could perhaps be regarded as a force of nature considering the changing climate?
TBH i really hope high-speed rail build today DOES have slow mode simply because moving at higher speed takes significally more (non-linear) energy, so when energy go down for some reason (prices under capitalism go up , say) whole rail network will fail down to slower speed gracefully instead of catastrophically (no rail service for anyone).
@@andrewrandrianasulu_High speed train can go relatively slowly on any high speed rail, also they don’t take that much energy
Ok, technology is a phenomen, but shouldnt we be establishing a greater purpous. Like quality of life should be the focus, essentialy making a better tomorrow for our youth, but we are failing so hard on worldscale it feels. The West done fucked.
@andrewrandrianasulu_ why would you want a railway to work less effectively?
high-speed rail is transport system for long distance high capacity transport it's MORE resource intensive to go slowly.
Without giving time to watch the video before commenting... Yes, we absolutely should be.
Sent from my nightmare rectangle.
luddism will be the end of humanity, the answer is fuck no.
Transhumanism is superior
My profession requires all sorts of tools. I've always been fascinated by them and enjoy using them. This has given me something to think about more deeply. Thank you for the video.
At its core, the tools no longer serve us, but instead we serve the tools.
Also, we are often so dependent upon these tools that should we become unable to make use of them for an extended period of time (like an EMP or carington event disabling the electric grid.) The effects would be disastrous (with the grid down scenario being a 90% casualty rate for the United States by year's end).
Also petroleum and ICEs.
I don’t think the emp argument is good, like the chance of random emp happening are likely similar to the chance of an asteroid or solar storm hitting earth, we shouldn’t worry about something that is so unlikely to happen, we should be realistic, electricity right know is literally the only way we have to stop climate change
Someone needs to make a movie or book where the internet stops working. Oh yeh, southpark made an episode like that. 😂
@@ni9274 Solar storms capable of damaging our electrical infrastructure already occord in the past.
Today we're far more dependent on electricity and at least in the US there is a significant shortage of replacement hardware in a similar event.
There is also the fact that tentions between world powers are rising rapidly, cyber warfare and emps are a real threat today
Thanks for reminding my depressed mind that there are people out there who are just as rearing and biting at the bit for change for the better of everyone, and the wisdom to ask necessary questions before we go racing off with half-baked idealism. You’re one of the few channels I make time for now-a-days, and such a lovely balance. Learning. 😊
Lifelong learning and access to knowledge should be free, but people's skills and expertise should be fairly compensated with safeguards baring formation of monopoly power and exploitation.
hear hear!
This is something I've been thinking about and working on for ~20 years. A major problem is apparent here, even. How do we organize conversations at any scale, complexity, and context. Our tools are insufficient for such conversation, so how can we expect to meaningfully apply our efforts. Most social order is out of our hands, where technology could serve even the democratization of all work spaces...yet it doesn't
Is there a way to DM?
A major barrier is adoption of a new paradigm. The ideal would be to achieve a state of Nash Equilibrium to hold people to adoption, but the adoption itself must be compelled by another force. "Efficiency" is that force; or in capitalist terms: increased capacity to out-compete. Adoption of a new paradigm compelled by the old paradigm's drive to "compete"
Most who operate under the capitalist paradigm leverage inefficiency and waste, so a more efficient and egalitarian paradigm can theoretically out-compete anything operating from the capitalist paradigm. Just needs the foundation of adaptation and efficient means for self-order
The umbrella this conversation exists under is large
The idea of a mirror is important, a technological mirror that the "people" / "users" have complete control over
This is important for maneuverability, adaptability, "dynamic equilibrium"
The tool must hold the seed of the paradigm (conviviality) so that its effects unfold whether the "user" holds the paradigm in their "belief system" or not
Have you considered that maybe communication at scale is one of the technologies that fails the tests/markers laid out in the video? That there is no way to communicate systemic change? I feel that is most likely.
The resource and energy requirements for things like the internet and phones are too great, and even the printing press - at scale - required the labour inputs of many indentured (whether slave or wage) humans (and, of course, non-humans). When you get beyond anything but the basic technologies (anything that isn't powered by humans or proximal natural resources like a stream), you face choices that usurp someone else's freedoms. There's no world in which my rich Western children spend their gap year toiling a copper mine in [national] service to their future internet use. We need the slaves. Or we go without.
That's the thing when you try and fit practical examples into these conceptual ideas (I'm a fan of Illich). They make explicit the impossibility of work around or bodge. We can do away with part X, but keep part Y because it's great - doesn't work. Everything must go. Then we start again. Because practical example, too, includes energy. We're running out of energy for all intents and purposes. The non-exploitative equivalent to fossil fuels doesn't exist (and if it did, would need a shit-ton of fossil fuels to get to it). Solar and wind don't reproduce solar and wind, and they don't solve the problems as laid out in the video. Not really. Not without turning a blind eye.
That's what the industrial revolution has been: a giant experiment on turning a blind eye. All while cheating by using the resources of several thousand generations in a hundredth of the timescale.
Your conversation will come. But it'll come at the appropriate (appropriate, as laid out in the video) level, and that will be - and always was - local. The world will make sure of that.
@@ricos1497 if I understand you correctly, I have considered the deficiencies in the communication systems that we use. There is a trajectory that communication/information/computation/networking technologies seems to want to follow, particularly in its reflection mechanisms of the social body. However, what you'll also see is a counter force basically corrupting technological evolution... for profit.
Technology should always serve people, period. The vision I have may take too much energy to convey here.... Anyway, seizing control of this virtual social body is important for seizing control of the social body all together. This requires a meaningful correspondence between the virtual body ("conversation" at any scale, complexity, and context) and actual reality.
I agree that slavery must be handled, and a complete transition is necessary. The intermediary time must be addressed, the bridge that supports mutual inclusivity between two paradigms must be discerned.
I'm sorry if this doesn't make much sense. I hate typing on my phone and I have limited energy for expanding on things when it'll go nowhere these days. But, I'm into this topic
ANDREWISM POSTED ‼️‼️
Can't help feel that the world just got slightly but measurably better.
I get so excited when i see a new video by them
Nerd
disney characters dancing gif
Like: Issued
I just think humans need to put empathy first.
I always THINK I have the main ideas of my thesis all layed out just before Andrew uploads and throws some more incredibly useful ideas at me, god damn it!
This really captures the feeling I get when institutions describe any change in the availability and reduced accessibility of technologies as having been done in the name of "modernisation" or sometimes even in the *name* of accessibility.
Me: Why did you close hundreds of local radio stations?
BBC: To focus on provideling amazing modern online experiences!
WE EARLY TODAY !! Thanks for recommending Bolo’bolo btw. That shit genuinely expanded my mind and gave me a new hope and drive for our future, hell, for today 💜🖤
I'm glad you enjoyed it!
i read the whole book! now im also reading the dawn of everything!
@@Somebodyherefornow adding to the list 💃🏽
I would love to see your opinions on fascism (specifically ultranational palengenesis) and how to fight it, especially in the context of things like the Armenian, Rohingya and Uyghur, and Rwandan genocides and of course the Holocaust. I think that many people know of these atrocities and see the same sentiments are around today, but don't know how to fight them. I think it's important that nothing like the Holocaust happens again to ANY people, religion, sexuality, ethnicity, or other way people are othered.
One of the things anarchists are best known for is their struggle against fascism. I once did a video on the subject, but I wasn't happy with it, so I took it down. There is plenty of advice on antifash action on Crimethinc and the Anarchist Library if you're looking though!
@@Andrewism thank you so much for the resources, and have an excellent day!
Fascism is a "revolutionary" rather than left or right wing.
@@Darth_Bateman you should own it instead of coping
Palestinians are currently fighting genocide, also there's no Uyghur genocide bro, that's western anti-China propaganda.
You should look into the concept of the broad welfare indicators (brede welvaart). It's another guideline for a better living space, but it's converted to numbers and graphs so it's easier to convince governments of its value
i absolutely love how you construct your videos. the explanations you provide for any given concept are always so clear, your voice is wonderful, & i really appreciate how you critique at the end :)
Convivality kinda feels like permaculture but instead of land 'management', it's applied to technology. A wonderful extension of an already wonderful concept, I'll make sure to check out more about it
I see much of the Conviviality observations are similar to and expressed in the original school of Anarchy; Mutualism. In particular personal freedom in interconnectedness, which is one of the key factors of life and social dynamics. Indeed mutuality is the cornerstone of Anarchist freedom
My eyes watered when you mentioned the feeling of frustration that you experience daily. You are so concise and calm when transferring knowledge that it’s easy for us to overlook how you, the teacher, might feel. Thank you for that moment of vulnerability. In that moment, I felt embraced. You are not alone.
Thank you so much for your videos. I found them many months ago. I admit, I haven't watched all of your content, but what I have had time and energy to watch has not only inspired me on a personal level in my life, but inspired my perspective on the world of persons speaking about and concerned about these topics.
In other words, it is good to have the occasional reminder to have hope. Much love 💜
This is giving me happy flashbacks to reading my “Convivial Toolbox” textbook at design school.
Amazing! Our third space fablab/cafe commons project +network is very much on this wavelength. Encouraging, thank you! 🌱
I have to say, the inclusion of beautiful surrealist paintings is such a boon to this content. You really knocked it out of the park with these visuals, this is exactly what I love to see. Keep it up!
i recommend the book “The Great Reclamation” by Rachel Heng. Its about the industrialization of Singapore back in the 40s-70s. One of the best books I’ve read about this topic
Another banger, thanks man. You're really good at bringing discrete concepts and pieces to the table and breaking down in a compelling way for people to integrate into their worldview/praxis.
I was literally thinking about how I was missing your content last week, Andrew! I went back and revisited some of your ICHH episodes, too. Great run-down of an ever more pressing issue, as always, and I always appreciate how you don't just criticize, you offer solutions, too. Also, the art you share on these videos is incredible!
Fab Labs are a kind of convivial space where you can build without being questioned. Although they are for a price, in my town, gifted students like me are automatically given a free membership until graduation. I wish there were one closer to where I live but it has still changed my life.
This was SO gooood. Long live tools of conviviality. 🔨oh and also really enjoy your art choices.
I've been thinking about this since I began working nearly a decade ago. When people invented cars, they expected people to be able to come to work even if they're from far away. When the internet was invented, they expected people to work faster and more efficient. When better and faster software is introduced, they expect people to keep up. Machines can be upgraded, people cannot. We're still the self-aware hairless apes that have been running and hunting for thousands of years. Taking the idea from Andrewism's video, I think the radical change for everyone is to make people realize that growth has a limit and people can only become so productive before they break down. To take a term from Our Changing Climate, we need degrowth.
brilliant video man, love your style and ur voice is so soothing
I love the art you use to accompany your words. They mesh beautifully.
There are attempts to create autonomous cars, but they don’t solve the major defects of car travel. Meanwhile, others on the planet are using and improving existing rail technology to solve the problems of travel in a rational and efficient manner.
Great video! I have not watched your work in a while, your editing and presentation has improved greatly.
Thank you very much! I try
34 seconds in and I am in love with this video. Using the tower of babel in the background as you describe capitalism is ugh so perfect. If consciously rejecting destructive products and practices makes me a luddite, the by all means I am OK with that.
Happy to have found your channel today! We are well aligned in thought, and you’ve given me some new resources to look into. Instant subscribe from me. Thank you!
Excellent video! Informative, thought provoking and inspiring conversations.
Its like people pushing prosthetics when the people missing the limbs would rather have different ways to go through life but insurance will pay for super expensive prostetics but not cushioned crutches/wheelchair. Prosthetics have their own set of problems, and sometimes the person who has too much of their leg amputated so a prosthetic is unable to fit securely on the limb. Many people choose to not even have a prostetic arm/hand because its just so hard to get the more advanced prosthetics to be useful,and would probably benefit more from being allowed to use their feet to act as their hands.
Even cancer treatment has its own disadvantages,so even if you're free from cancer,you might end up with tinitus and your quality of life decreases because of it.
Question, is there any solarpunk community i could potentially join or look into? (I don't like using reddit) would it be possible to create a discord server for this channel or would that go against the beliefs of solar punk, degrowth and this channel due to discord being a corporation?
Discord is an organization tool, I'm sure there are less detrimental tools but the popularity makes it easier for outreach. There's a few servers but they all seem pretty quiet
@@meltossmedia there was always i few questions i wanted to ask about solar punk, degrowth etc bit there wasn't really a community to do so, a discord server is the best place for such communities and so i would love for andrewism to set one up. I just wasn't sure if it matches with his principles thankyou for clarifying. Its a shame that there aren't many active servers.
I'm not actively involved with it, but I do have a discord that accomodates solarpunk-related discussions: discord.gg/JGWfdVW3Yf
@@Andrewism thankyou
Excellent video. All power to all the people.
Thanks for posting this. Nice to see others thinking. Even if we disagree with things moving forward, is still growth.
I believe the change must be radical, quick, and collective. But not much has happened. Nor can it under current global conundrums. In the quest of endless growth we lost are mind along the way.
I love your videos so much. Continue to take care of yourself and come out with new content.
Thank you. A great topic, inspired by a great author. Nicely done.
love all your videos, this year please upload more
listening to this video at work while manning a huge industrial press, and also thinking about how machine learning has emerged as a new tool. i cant not have conflicting feelings about ai as an artist because well, i still use modern tools that past crafters did not have access to. i edit painting scans in photoshop, for example, and use digital art programs. insightful stuff as always!
bio-interaction also has me going back to my desire to synthesize my grad work in biomimicry (the mainstream of which is definitely green capitalist and often technofetishistic) with anarchism and especially eco anarchism. i appreciate the emphases on the idea that the best tools are not always the most high tech or complex.
thanks for bringing illich on your channel !!
Thanks for the Video!
I Feel more Informed now!
Was a pleasant surprise to hear Anark on this video
Keep building the vision, brother.
All the love, all the power.
Thanks for your great inputs.
Quality vid as usual. Glad you uploaded.
Thank you for always uplifting my spirit with hope and wisdom.
Yo yesterday i finished limits to medicine after re-reading tools to conviviality... the timing of your video is crazy. Love how you broke things down. I share many of your reservations--his arguments are so striking and beatiful to me it is a struggle to remind myself not to forgo whatever suspicion is due.
I bet you have loads on your reading list but i really recommend you read limits to medicine when you get a chance--again the speed and breadth of his references i found hard to track. Limits is still less about laying out a clear program and but he clearly states more about an ethic: no expansion of freedoms that put a limit on someone else's freedom and capacity for autonomy. I'm not so sure of a hardline against all industrially produced goods and services but extreme preudice in their implementation... or idk maybe i missed the point that the logic of these outputs is always to enslave.
There are also recordings of him speaking on youtube and some interviews with david cayley that are pretty helpful to contextualizing his work.
I think the lack of a program is on purpose? There is a sense of play and maybe an unwillingness to articulate a new dogma on accident behind this informed by is understanding of the development of Christianity, especially its institutionalization over millenia and its relationship to western state formations. Something that also wasnt so clear in tools to me is illich's radical interpretation of christian gospel--he speaks so powerfully about friendship, individual relationships, transformative love, unbounded morality and i think maybe the challenge is for us think and spell out how we live and connect these things to our political projects?
Theres still a lot for me to scrutinize and get thru myself but i have so far been thoroughly enjoying illich.
Appreciate this vid and the stuff you put out in general. Keep going!
Thanks for the rec, I have had some trouble getting into his work on medicine due to a level of scepticism to some of his claims that I haven't seen engagement with outside of him, but I'll give it a try
@@Andrewism appreciate the reply. not sure if you'll see this but been thinking about what you shared and my initial comment wasn't that well thought out.
in limits you'll probably still have the same problem of accepting all of his evidence (although limits does have a huge bibliography) and some of his conclusions.
but more than anything though i think anyone can learn from his skepticism of "medicine" (which for him isn't some eternal or benign practice or concept but a way of structuring and interacting with the world that can only emerge with/from the industrial revolution), its conflation with the practice of healing/health. and ultimately he raises questions about what this means about how we understand and pursue justice.
if you see this i hope this a decent framing. hope i don't come off like some sycophant.
looking forward to your next video.
I'm so grateful for this video specifically because you've touched on many topics I'm very passionate about but lack the language and awareness to properly communicate, and introduced new words and concepts that I'm very eager to research and learn more about. One thing that I'm looking into right now, personally, is methods of developing computer-like tools using locally-sourced materials in a way that's sustainable and accessible. Not just to give people more access to computer-like technology, but to empower people to learn about it through physical interaction and experimentation. For example, I think artificial intelligence and machine learning are fantastic - except for its being hidden behind IPs, developed for profit, and intentionally designed to benefit the company over the individual. But it doesn't have to be that way, and I don't think it should be.
Anyway, just very grateful for this video further inspiring me to pursue learning about computer architecture in the hopes of contributing to more community-focused and open-source, transparent methods of digital communication and innovation. ❤
These videos mean a lot, thank you
I'm so glad this channel exists.
Often when I try to convey the practical steps to take back control of essential resources like food and shelter to not be controlled by monopolies and landlords, the usual response is "That sounds great, but it will only work on the small scale". And? Many small communities doing this seperately is both doable and no less significant than doing it as one larger "society". They think only in nation states and see any small scale as seemingly invalid.
Social change has to start somewhere and then build its momentum. Some will only be convinced by successful case studies to try for themselves. Unfortunately, some people devalue these local experiments as though the only successes worth celebrating spring out of nowhere with millions of people (when in most cases those successes also started small)
Of course, on the other side of things, we don't want these small scale experiments to become navel-gazey and parochial so there is a need to agitate on a larger scale as well.
"Modern Technology isn't the problem, it's how centralized capitalism uses those tools to enslave humanity. Decentralization and open source is the answer"
Ms Anthropy
aka Yamato Musashi
Decentrify Tech
this move from useful tools to something else reminds me of the transition from hardware to software in home appliances. the amount of mechanical precision of moving parts just to get a video cassette to play properly is insane. doubly so for laser-disks. each tool was made to purpose. when we transition to software, as we're seeing now, you can update on the fly. You no longer need to sell a finished product but the promise of the potential for a finished product. the rise in technology provides some convenience for the consumer and disproportionately more convenience for those that hold capital. the high tide isn't rising all boats equally. if it did, it wouldn't be as successful.
I have nothing to add, but wanted to say that this video is brilliant
Hell yeah, great vid as always
I already am a luddite. Been one since I read the Unibomber manifesto. Haven't used a car or cell phone in years and I'm all the better for it.
thank you for the upfront definition of traditional Luddites. A LOT of people lose that meaning.
------
let's not forget though....
luddites are not anti-capitalist, they are not de-growth
This is very useful. Thanks
Anprims are my FAVORITE type of leftie, despite vehemently disagreeing with it.
It’s like, the single most based way to be wrong.
I appreciated your shout-out to the Congo at 18:55 #freecongo 🇨🇩
Great video although I’m sceptical about what you say about libraries - I’m a critical librarian - a librarian who acknowledges the embedded hegemonic power dynamics in libraries. Libraries are extensions of colonialism especially in terms of knowledge production
Explain, please
these videos are literally lectures, you could put together a course outline and teach at a college with this shit fr fr I feel like I need to take notes (I do take notes)
I have a tShirt saying 'The Luddites Were Right', it gets lots of good reaction, and a great chance to explain why.
Thoughtful stuff. Keep on comrades:)
Re: the decentralisation of knowledge and specialisation:
Knowledge should be freely available wherever possible, but people should not be expected to have an opinion on everything. Some subjects are incredibly dangerous to only have a superficial understanding of, such as chemistry, rocketry, or politics, and if you cannot commit yourself to deeply understanding the issues it is generally better to leave these issues to the experts at hand.
That said, I don't believe that everyone becoming a specialist is necessarily the "right" outcome here. Generally, better than being able to understand a field, it's better to understand the methodology, so you can at least vet claims to a basic degree even if you don't understand the very complex aspects of it. Generally speaking, economies are built in a pyramid structure - you have "unskilled" labour at the bottom, specialists in the middle, and then generalists who specialise in maintaining a *broad* field of knowledge in order to coordinate between fields of specialists.
I believe that as society gives way to increasing AI and automation replacing current labour theories of value, we will see specialism become increasingly assigned to automation and more generalised understandings becoming the dominant factor in economic production - if only because it's easier for any one person to have access to lots of information and lots of AI specialists.
I believe the trend towards specialisation started in the agricultural age, became a dominant trend throughout industrialism, and will taper off as global economies more fully convert to information-based economies. Specialists will become increasingly specialised, but there will be fewer specialists overall as machine learning decentralises access to specialist labour.
I'll give an example using a rapidly developing industry: video games.
50 years ago, all video games were created by specialists. These people had to figure out all the basics of video games, like how to create an image on screen, how to make inputs move things on screen, how to make things have collision.
Now, these ideas are so commonplace, anyone can download an open source game engine like Godot or Unity and have these functions built into them. No one needs to be a specialist in order to make a video game that has moving parts and collision and graphics.
Now, the video game industry is bigger than ever. There are more specialists in this field than ever before. However, the decentralisation of knowledge in this industry has opened the field up to many, many people who are very much not specialists to create works in the industry. While the number of specialists has risen, the ratio has changed from zero non-specialists in the industry to, arguably, the majority of the industry is now composed of non-specialists tinkering away in their free time using publicly available information.
These people often don't specialise in video games but integrate a variety of interests into their work, such as graphic design, music, story telling, political ideologies, etc. - unlike a specialist within the industry who might have a job working solely on one aspect of one piece of the whole engine (such as water effects). Overall, the field has transitioned from a specialist-driven field (headed by a generalist developer) into a generalist-driven field referencing the works of previous specialists to coherently assimilate their ideas.
Your pieces are a ward against the hopeless external and internal notion of the flaming doomrocket
Haven’t watched yet, but I just want to say, I don’t fear technological advances that make human life better, as long as we share in the surplus that it provides and it isn’t hoarded amongst capital owners.
I fear that we will only care about those at the top and not about making life better for all.
As long as that one thing happens, that is the same reason for anything happening at all in this day and age
10:20 i wish i could argue with you on that but being self aware for just a moment i have to admit that yeah most tech nowadays you either have to have the time and ability to invest into it or have just built your life around it. Anybody who tells you tech is easy is probably in the second group
I JUST finished listening to another hour and a half video about the real history of the luddites!
great video!
Though the anesthetics of cyberpunk is really cool, i strongly oppose it in real life. I think social media was a disaster to human interaction and mental health. The internet brought consumerism to unprecedented levels. The easy access to information makes people more and more dependent, as we make no more effort to remember facts. I have a bad feeling about the future.
Me too. I have no idea where to start
Same.. Can someone help point us to resources or ideas please?
Haha. And this is the problem, everyone needs a youtube video to do simple things, just rewild, humanity's independence is gained by our natural resources. Plant native flora and grow food with community members, go against the divide and conquer of the working class by the government
no, I agree that in certain contexts, specialization is necessary and total accessibility in all cases could potentially do more harm, than good, for the overall society
Whether the answer is yes or no, I'm reminded of the meme Daniel Quinn identified about our civilization that says "There's one right way to live and our way is it." One right or superior religion, skin tone, country, economic system, sexual orientation, political affiliation, or opinion on everything. We can see this meme in our own activism when we assert there's one right way to be an activist, a leftist or an anarchist, or one right opinion on a subject.
To buck this trend we have to live by a new meme: "There is no one right way to live." This means to the best extent we can, we should not attempt to force our way onto others or assert there is one right opinion to have on AI or technology in this case.
In line with this "no one right way" meme, which is a meta counter to the status quo, I believe our activism directed towards the public should always be based in friendly persuasion and voluntary enticement rather than coercion, shame or social force (that's the old way).
We shouldn't try to "abolish AI" as I saw a creator on Instagram promote or claim that's the only acceptable stance on AI.
I personally think a "ban it" stance will more likely lead to the nightmare scenarios coming true and a more fruitful effort will be to proactively fight to ensure AI benefits all of humanity and specifically the working class by promoting a "Workers Bill of Rights in the Age of AI" that could be enshrined by individual businesses (led by unions and worker organization) that would mean ensuring AI automation is used to get us to a 4 day and then 3 day work week for all workers rather than contribute to an unemployment crisis over the next twenty years. Cities could also be lobbied to grant tax benefits and other incentives to companies that use AI/automation to funnel productivity gains into increased worker wealth and benefits (aka companies that have signed the Workers Bill of Rights). Same could go for companies that use a democratic worker-owner business structure, which could be part of the bill of rights.
Let me tell you, film photography cured my depression! It didn't actually, but it helped
Love your videos
Thanks Andrew
I wonder what your thoughts on Permaculture would be, since it's essentially a modern version of indigenous land practice that was first inspired by Aboriginal peoples in Australia, but then expanded and combined indigenous knowledge together to create a really robust system. For me, stuff like being able to grow most of your food through food forests, build structures like WOFATI that don't need heating or cooling technologies, or regenerative seawater agricultures, all while using local materials to do it really speak to the conviviality that you describe here.
The arrival of platforms like RUclips and Spotify were touted as a "democratization of art". However, because people don't actually own or maintain the distribution platforms they release on, it's really just serfdom with extra steps. What we have now is techno-feudalism: if we want the next era to be anything more than a lateral jump, then we have to strike monoliths and corporations from it entirely. A federated network akin to Mastodon is one way to accomplish this, but we have to find a way to get around current memory and bandwidth constraints. Megacorporations can throw a lot of money at a constraint in order to secure resources that individuals can't.
22:44 Educate, Agitate, Organize, btw mass transport can be very estranging and dehumanizing
I'd like a chance to speak with you about this. We are working on this right now.
Awesome! would love to hear more
5:48. This hits close to home there 😢
Yes. To a point.
Today all technologies are thought to be good. However, people have forgotten and "new" and "improved" are two different things.
It is hard to improve without newness.
It is easy to make something new that is no better than what came before.
If new technologies do not improve without detrimental effect, they should be discarded.
The luddites didnt like people from the countryside which also had a culture of people sharing resources to move into restrictive factories taking all their energy without proper rewards.
You also have to recognize that when the luddites rose up was also the time when clocks first became widespread. First by hanging on the walls of factories, telling the supervisor what time you came in. Speaking of tools becoming less useful and more a tool of controlling you.
Well said.
I totally agree with your argument around the 10 minute mark about how specialization did exist. Even going back to prior to machines, you had artisans that were masters of one trade. Or you look at any physics, math, computer science. There's just no way to truly be a master at all of the things. I'm 100% in favor of making things accessible but even then there will be a degree of specialization just due to the limitations of being human.
I agree. The thing to hold in consideration is not crossing the line, wherein people become so hyper-specialized; they are no longer human but mere cogs in a machine. Slaved to a singular purpose all their life, else given extraordinary power over other people because they alone have the skills and knowledge to operate a critical tool. Hyper-specialization doesn't just enslave us, it alienates us, renders us into nigh-impenetrable castes.
🎉🎉🎉 happy new andrewism vid day!! 🎉🎉🎉
This page gives me peace