Progress Without People: New Technology, Unemployment, and the Message of Resistance

by David F. Noble

A provocative discussion of the role of technology and its accompanying rhetoric of limitless progress in the concomitant rise of joblessness and unemployment.

Genres: Technology, Nonfiction, History, Economics

184 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1993

About the author

Librarian Note: There is more than one author by this name in the Goodreads database.

David Franklin Noble was a critical historian of technology, science and education.

Reviews

[Petter Nordal · Rating 4 out of 5]

While the details of Luddite rebellion in the first three decades of 19th England century are interesting in themselves, Noble's argument is actually far more compelling and interesting. Noble argues that the Luddites, far from being naïve and backwards-looking, were consciously trying to shape the implementation of new technologies, needing to slow the destruction of older economic relations until people could adjust to newer ones. They were faced with three choices: 1. lose their jobs; 2. commit violence against the factory owners who were destroying jobs; or 3. destroy equipment, to make it less profitable to throw people out of work. They chose property destruction over violence or starvation. Additionally, the Luddites did not object to the use of high speed, high-efficiency machines, they objected to the unemployment, the lack of compassion, the absence of social responsibility.

Noble then applies these criticisms to industrial developments in metalworking in the US after WWII and finds some striking similarities to our own technological revolution. He argues that, while many processes were developed to improve metalworking after the war, the ones that ultimately prevailed were not the ones which were most efficient. He demonstrates how several alternate techniques actually had better results more quickly that the NC (Numeric Control) machining which eventually came to dominate the industries, and in fact the NC machines were often slower for a significant period of years.

So why was there so much investment in the less efficient machines? Simple: the owners paid the R & D costs, and the owners were more concerned about control than about pure efficiency or quality. NC machines held the promise of being able(eventually) to manufacture high quality goods WITHOUT SKILLED LABOR (precisely like the looms that the Luddites objected to). If you depend upon skilled workers, those workers have some control, most obviously because they can't be easily replaced. If the workers are minimally skilled, they can be more easily replaced, hence the owners have more control.

As teachers we are increasingly asked to present information, rather than doing the difficult, highly complex and skilled job of teaching it. Increasingly we are expected to use websites and implement technological processes of dubious endurance which nevertheless puts large amounts of tax dollars into the bank accounts of high tech companies and entrepreneurs. The true skills of teaching--knowing your students, their communities and needs, and being able to engage and develop them-- are being moved in the direction of engaging information, being moved away from human to human interaction. Then we are measured not by how much our students are satisfied, how much they are able to understand the world, how well they do at work, in the university, at the polling place, nor even on how much they have read or how well they can write, but rather by how well they do on standardized tests. If teachers are deskilled, what will happen to education?

[Andrew · Rating 3 out of 5]

I was hoping for a more in-depth look at the actual Luddite movement, but I'm pleased with what I got nonetheless. This is a short and somewhat dry collection of essays that nevertheless presents a vital and under-represented viewpoint: that despite our collected wisdom, technological progress is not "inevitable," and that we commoners should and can have a say in how and when such progress takes place.

Noble opens the book jarringly, coming out right away with what amounts to an extremely radical, anarchist assertion about the way technology displaces workers and should be either controlled or dismantled. Most of the first section is not only dated but also tediously one-note. However, there is enough of value in the 2nd half -- involving him fleshing out his original assertion in clear and logical terms -- to make the entire book recommendable.

There are several memorable passages. His well-supported argument for how the desire for control is at the heart of all technological engineering (chiefly control by managers and owners, but also by the very engineers), and his systematic dismantling of free market theory are my two favorites.

He also importantly notes that purchasing more technology in order to "streamline" production very frequently results in higher costs for the owner and no appreciable reduction in prices for the consumer. According to Noble the only rational reason for owners to pursue technology is to subjugate and/or eliminate the bothersome workforce. Again, this is well beyond Marx in extremity, but it is well argued and certainly gives food for thought if nothing else.

I would definitely recommend this to anyone interested in economics or political theory, especially if you identify as socialist or anarcho-syndicalist. I myself came to it through Chomsky (who I think is pretty great), so I already had a taste of fairly radical thought. Noble provides a nice progression from Chomsky IMO.

Not Bad Reviews

@pointblaek

[Rhys · Rating 3 out of 5]

Facing technology in the present is the gist of this book.

"Technological determinism – the domination of the present by the past – and technological progress – the domination of the present by the future – have combined in our minds to annihilate the technological present. The loss of the concrete, the inevitable consequence of the subordination of people at the point of production, has thus resulted also in the loss of the present as the realm for assessments, decisions, and actions. This intellectual blind-spot, the inability even to comprehend technology in the present tense, much less act upon it, has inhibited the opposition and lent legitimacy to its inaction" (p.6).

Noble calls out the inner-Luddite in each of us to challenge technology, which he sees as conforming to the relations of power. Rage against the machine and fight The Man ...

Interestingly he says: "Industrial policy really is social policy, and indicators of success should not be the degree of industrial competitiveness or the number of machines or the return on investment, but rather the level of satisfaction of our citizens" (p.125), which can be measured by full employment, stable communities, sound infrastructure, better health, education, food, clothing and shelter, and a fuller democracy.

[Dang Manh]

I read this during university because it was recommended in Chomsky's "Understanding power" book. At that time I thought it was good, however later on when I began to read more about Marx I saw that he was kinda unfair to Marx. Really, Marx was simply saying that the Luddites's action gave the British government a pretext to destroy them. And he said that Marx did not support them ! A bad thing about the book is the last chapter where the author goes into conspiracy theories.

[Neil · Rating 4 out of 5]

It must have felt like Noble was shouting into the void in the 1990s, but with the “neo-Luddite” revival well underway, this would make a good primer for any and all of technology’s critics. Somebody should reissue it (along with the rest of the Noble corpus).

[Ardi · Rating 5 out of 5]

A gem

[Gabriel Morgan · Rating 5 out of 5]

I got this book at a yard sale in 1996 in upstate New York. It turned out to be a classic short introduction to its subject, filled with persuasive arguments and original ideas. It once belonged to someone named Antoine Charvet. His name is still in it. Thank you , Antoine.

David Noble was a good one, a restless intelligence who died too young.

How is it that one can't get out of high school without learning that Wellington beat Napoleon at Waterloo, but one can graduate from college never learning that Wellington led an even larger army against British peasants?

Another good thing about Noble, he drew an early bead on the zioscum, the way they were slithering around our university system and excreting their foul mucus into all branches of the culture. A pity Noble died in 2010, and didn't live to see what appears to be the appraoching downfall of Scumbagistan (Israel).

God itwill be sweet!

[david · Rating 4 out of 5]

this book is fantastic. very very important. David Noble, rest in peace.