Thomas Daiser explores the historical and ongoing resistance to technology, emphasizing that opposition often stems from concerns about power dynamics and societal impacts rather than outright anti-progress sentiment. He advocates for collective, systemic approaches to critically engage with AI and technology, focusing on the political-economic forces behind their development rather than blaming individual users.
The video features an interview with Thomas Daiser, author of the book “Techno Negative: A Long History of Refusing the Machine,” which explores historical resistance to technology. Daiser discusses various movements and individuals who have opposed technological advancements, not always out of a desire for progress but often to preserve existing power structures or due to concerns about societal impacts. He highlights groups like the French anarchist group Clau in the early 1980s, who bombed computer companies because they viewed computers as tools of state violence and control, particularly in military and police contexts.
Daiser traces resistance to technology back to ancient times, starting with figures like Archimedes, who reportedly destroyed his own inventions to prevent misuse. He also examines medieval religious groups that opposed certain technologies, fearing they might lead to human pride and distract from religious devotion. These early resistances were often about maintaining religious or social power rather than promoting liberation. Moving forward, he discusses the Luddites of the early 19th century, workers who violently resisted automated looms threatening their jobs and crafts, illustrating a labor-focused opposition to technological change that resonates with contemporary concerns about AI and automation.
The conversation then shifts to the present, where Daiser critiques the narrative promoted by many AI companies and tech CEOs who openly acknowledge the disruptive and potentially harmful impacts of AI, such as job losses, yet continue to push these technologies aggressively. He argues that this “honesty” is strategic, designed to preempt criticism while avoiding meaningful action to mitigate negative consequences. Daiser stresses the importance of understanding AI within its broader political and economic context, focusing on who benefits from these technologies and how they shape power dynamics, rather than viewing AI as an inevitable or purely technological phenomenon.
Addressing the common perception that resistance to technology equates to being anti-progress, Daiser clarifies that his work does not advocate blanket opposition to technology. Instead, he calls for nuanced analysis to distinguish between forms of resistance that aim to improve society and those that reinforce authoritarianism or reactionary politics. He warns against simplistic or conspiratorial views of AI and technology, emphasizing the need for collective, structural approaches to resistance rather than individual acts of refusal, which are often ineffective given the pervasive and coercive nature of modern technologies.
Finally, Daiser offers practical advice for those feeling overwhelmed by technological change. He encourages collective engagement and organizing to critically assess and respond to new technologies, rather than blaming individual users who often rely on these tools out of necessity or vulnerability. He draws parallels to environmental activism, noting that systemic problems require systemic solutions, and cautions against divisive tactics that alienate potential allies. The interview concludes with a call to focus on the corporations and political-economic systems driving technological development, rather than targeting everyday users, to foster meaningful resistance and change.