Rural Luddism and the makeshift economy of the Nottinghamshire framework knitters

Abstract

This article explores the geography and culture of machine breaking in Nottinghamshire, home to the Luddite framework knitters. Earlier accounts have shed some light on why Luddism broke out in 1811-12; but they have had much less to say about why it assumed the form and the geography that it did.

Automation in the Life Science Research Laboratory

“…When integrating new automation into any workplace environment, the impact on workers and how they view new machinery must be carefully considered. Beginning in the rural English midlands with the machine breaking Luddite movement (Roberts, 2017), societal resistance to automated machinery replacing manual labour and the threat it poses to livelihoods understandably continues into the present day (Jones, 2013;Autor, 2015). Both positive and negative reactions to the introduction of automation have been observed amongst long-term workers in clinical laboratory settings (Thomson and McElvania, 2019) and it is reasonable to anticipate that similar reactions may arise in research laboratories.…”

“Harmful to the commonality”: the Luddites, the distributional effects of systems change and the challenge of building a just society

“…Frame-breaking, union organizing – referred to in legislation as combination at the time – and oath taking were made capital offences, leading to several hangings and many deportations (Roberts, 2017; Bailey, 1998). These were extreme responses to challenges to the industrialist development pathway, and they could be enacted for the great to the small: while several Luddites were hanged outside York Castle for their involvement in the death of a factory owner, one Thomas Helliker, who was hanged for refusing to name his compatriots in a friendly society/union under the Combination acts (Bailey, 1998, p. 13).…”

“…While the Luddites generally perceived the past as preferable to the present, the system of arrangements they proposed was a mixture of reforms that accommodated old priorities focused on a respectable remuneration for their work with new demands such as education and price controls, with a few radical proposals such as republicanism included in some visions. While we have identified the workers’ level of the system as in reorganization, it is clear from the historical record that the Luddites were not in an advantageous position or even equal footing with owners; the resort to “Luddism, though a calculated tactic, issued from the desperation of the knitters” (Roberts, 2017, p. 393). The choice of violence may be seen as a result of there being fewer if any avenues open to them: “Luddism, though a calculated tactic, issued from the desperation of the knitters” (Roberts, 2017, p. 393).…”

“…While we have identified the workers’ level of the system as in reorganization, it is clear from the historical record that the Luddites were not in an advantageous position or even equal footing with owners; the resort to “Luddism, though a calculated tactic, issued from the desperation of the knitters” (Roberts, 2017, p. 393). The choice of violence may be seen as a result of there being fewer if any avenues open to them: “Luddism, though a calculated tactic, issued from the desperation of the knitters” (Roberts, 2017, p. 393). At the time, several observers compared the general feeling of unrest and unhappiness with that of the time of Charles I, immediately preceding and precipitating the English Civil War and the brief Republic (Gardner, 1994, p. 74).…”

“…Enclosure of almost 85,000 acres of common lands between 1787 and 1810 increased the pressures on rural and semi-rural workers to be entirely supported through wages by removing their access to food and material through grazing rights applied to these lands. While a consequence of the enclosures were the subsequent restoration of the forests, which gave Luddites places to hide and organize, the overall picture was one of increased desperation (Roberts, 2017, p. 391). Consider this contemporary commentary from George Sturt “the enclosure […] left people helpless against influences which have sapped away their interest, robbed them of security and peace, rendered their knowledge and skill of small value and seriously affected their personal pride and their character” (as quoted in Sale, 1995, p. 35).…”