ahab as luddite

[Terrance]

David Morris wrote:
> 
> Interesting discussion above.  On one hand Ludd and Blicero are opposites.
> Ludd's romantacism was anti-technological.  Blicero's is pro-technological.
> But Ludd didn't seek the transcendent experience that Ahab and Blicero do.
> Ludd's goals were purely political:  he sought to maitain the existing
> decentralized production (and power).  He comes off a little bit insane,
> tilting at windmills, because his goal was already impossible, just as is
> trying to stop bio-engineering.
> 


Political? Hmmmmmm, yes, and why is Ludd's political goal unattainable?
Politics? 
Sociteies, civilization, governments, nation states, have  been able to
reject certain technics prior to their introduction. No matter what the
arguments for potential gains and profits, the possible losses were
considered to great and the technic, be it an alphabet or writing, a
machine, was rejected. We're talking about so many novels at once here
now, but how about One Hundred Years of Solitude?, anyways, there is
some political  will that is lacking, and not some inevitable progress.
Isn't there? 

Technology is not a spirit, it is not alive, it is not a force like
gravity, it is all the tools and technics we use to act. There is a
difference between technology and technological activity. Toilet paper
is technology. Taking a Blooming dump on  the privy and wiping your arse
with the news is a technological activity. There is a difference between
politics in the abstract and political activity. And it seems that
technological activity has somehow limited political activity.