A Sensitive Topic
Technology resistance sometimes crosses from legitimate protest into dangerous territory. Documenting these cases is important for understanding the full spectrum of the neo-Luddite phenomenon, while being careful not to provide a roadmap for harmful actions.
Historical Precedents
The original Luddites engaged in machine-breaking as a form of protest. This industrial sabotage, while illegal, was targeted at property rather than people. However, the movement's suppression involved significant violence, with the British government deploying more troops against Luddites than against Napoleon.
Contemporary Incidents
Infrastructure Attacks
There have been documented cases of vandalism against data centers, autonomous vehicle testing facilities, and communications infrastructure. While most incidents cause property damage rather than personal injury, the potential for escalation is concerning.
Threats Against Researchers
AI researchers and technology executives have reported receiving threats, particularly those working on controversial applications like autonomous weapons or surveillance technology. Online harassment campaigns sometimes escalate to real-world intimidation.
The Unabomber Legacy
Ted Kaczynski's bombing campaign (1978-1995), motivated by anti-technology ideology, killed three people and injured 23 others. While an extreme outlier, the Unabomber manifesto continues to circulate in technology-skeptic communities, raising concerns about radicalization.
Understanding Radicalization
People don't typically leap from skepticism to violence. Radicalization often involves:
- Economic displacement creating genuine grievance
- Exposure to increasingly extreme rhetoric
- Sense of powerlessness against large institutions
- Online communities reinforcing extreme views
- Belief that conventional action is futile
Recognizing these patterns may help prevent escalation by addressing root causes before they lead to violence.
Legitimate vs. Illegitimate Action
It's important to distinguish between:
- Legitimate protest — Organizing, advocacy, boycotts, political action
- Civil disobedience — Nonviolent rule-breaking accepting legal consequences
- Sabotage — Property destruction, which is illegal but may not endanger lives
- Violence — Actions that threaten or harm people, which are never justified
Conflating all technology skepticism with extremism is unfair and counterproductive. Most people concerned about AI would never contemplate illegal action, let alone violence.
Preventing Escalation
Research on deradicalization suggests that effective approaches include:
- Addressing legitimate grievances through policy
- Providing channels for meaningful participation in decisions
- Creating economic support for those displaced by technology
- Building bridges between technology developers and affected communities
- Countering extremist narratives with nuanced alternatives
Our Position
This project documents extremism because understanding requires honesty about uncomfortable topics. We unequivocally condemn violence and threats against any person, regardless of their role in technology development.
Effective technology resistance works through democratic processes: organizing, voting, lobbying, and persuasion. Violence is both morally wrong and strategically counterproductive, typically strengthening rather than weakening the forces it opposes.