The Luddites weren’t anti-technology—they opposed machines that destroyed their livelihoods and benefited factory owners at workers’ expense. Their resistance was a critique of the social and economic chaos caused by the Industrial Revolution. Over time, “Luddite” became an insult due to capitalist propaganda, dismissing their valid concerns about inequality and exploitation. Seen in context, they were early critics of unchecked capitalism and harmful technological change—issues still relevant today.
There’s something of a myth of a “model demographic” that I think is being misapplied by those “falling for the propaganda.” Of course, it’s a meme, but when I refer to certain groups or individuals in a positive light, I don’t mean to imply they were ethically perfect or without flaws. What I mean is that they were actively challenging the systems that needed to be challenged. In that sense, the praise is about their resistance to a deeply exploitative system, not an endorsement of every action or belief they held.
For example, many view Malcolm X positively—not because he was without contradictions, but because he challenged oppressive systems and presented a radical alternative. Similarly, someone like Luigi Mangione might be admired for resisting corporate or state control in his own way, even though the context is different.