Neo-Luddism - a future based on simplicity (first published on indymedia.ie Nov. 2012)
People who have asked me about Neo-Luddism often assume
that I am completely anti technology, but that is not the case. Like the original
Luddites, I am opposed to the use of technology to disempower and impoverish
people and I am also opposed to the abuse of technology simply to make profit
or to kill (sometimes it’s both).
We have had technology for a long time, some would consider the stick, a flint
hand axe or fire as the first technology; hence to be opposed to technology
per se is somewhat disingenuous.
My position is not based on ignorance – I have a science degree, which
consisted primarily of Business Studies and Computer Science; I have personal
experience of working in the City of London for financial institutions and financial
publications and I spent 10 years living a thoroughly modern lifestyle in one
of the world’s major cities and I have also visited several other major
cities around the world.
My position is based on personal experience and observation of the system of
human civilization that most people would (incorrectly) describe as Capitalist
society. Like previous versions of this system, which appears to have emerged
from the early city states of Arabia, I believe this version is also destined
to crash.
The difference now is that the system has spread to encompass the whole planet
and hence its collapse will have a global rather than a localized impact. If
we consider the Earth as a system, I would posit that it is a single input closed
system. That single input is radiation, mostly solar, although the Earth is
on rare occasions influenced by the impact of meteorites. However, in terms
of Human existence we can effectively ignore the infrequent input of a significant
meteorite collision.
A truly closed system is one that has no outside inputs, but our planet has
a single continuous energy input from the sun, that is fixed within a narrow
range (TSI approx. 1.3 KW/m2). Everything else here is of finite quantity –
there is a limited amount of useable water, useable land, limited fossil fuels,
limited air-borne gasses, limited metals etc.
The natural equilibrium established over millions of years does allow variance
in temperature, drinkable water, oxygen levels etc, however these are within
limits defined by the size and content of the system – i.e. the physical
limitations of this planet, a factor in life that we have tended to ignore.
After several millennia of experiments in living – what me might call
civilizations we still do not seemed to have mastered the basics of prudent
use of resources, cooperation for the benefit of the species or understanding
the limits imposed by being a constituent of what is essentially a closed system.
I believe that our current state of technology could enable us to achieve an
equitable, sustainable and efficient way of living, but I do not believe that
we currently have the will to implement such a way of life. Technology is employed
mostly to find more creative ways of killing each other, creating mostly useless
rubbish for consumers to buy and also for finding more efficient and cheaper
methods of achieving the above.
Alvin Toffler wrote what I’d consider a visionary book about our future
in 1970, entitled ‘Futureshock’. Unfortunately Toffler’s disturbing
predictions proved to be correct and I’d suggest that the onward march
of technology, which seems to be for its own sake, is making our problems worse,
not better.
Two other writers that have influenced my thinking are E.F. Schumacher and Thom
Hartmann. Although writing from vastly different perspectives, I feel that both
of them accurately illustrate the mistakes we’ve made and the problems
that we will continue to encounter.
If we must insist on filling our homes with useless plastic crud, manufactured
and shipped from China (or the next up-and-coming cheap producer) and continue
to rely on those others than ourselves and our immediate social circle for the
necessities of life then I think that we can expect our civilization to completely
collapse within decades.
I do not endorse Neo-Luddism simply because I find a simple lifestyle to be
emotionally satisfying. I believe that simplicity, up-skilling and self-reliance
are essential tools for survival. If I am indeed right about a collapse then
those who are just good with iPads will have dramatically lower chances than
those who are good with basic knowledge of food production, herbal medicine,
DIY, mechanics, etc.
If I am wrong (I’d honestly love to be wrong) then these are all additional
skills that might come in useful at some point, might be fun to indulge in and
could even save on expenditure. Personally I am not prepared to put my faith
in a technological solution to the world’s problems. After millennia of
perceived ‘progress’ we can’t even stop killing each other
(over 1.6m deaths due to murder, suicide or war in 2002 – WHO/GBD stats),
so call me cynical but I think I will continue to hedge my bets!