Who were the Luddites? Their legacy ripples through politics, cultural commentary and literature

Image from ‘Through the Fray: a tale of the Luddite Riots, etc.,’ by George Alfred Henty, published in 1897. (British Library/Flickr) Who were the Luddites? Their legacy ripples through politics, cultural commentary and literature Published: August 5, 2026 9.52am EDT Share article Print article American filmmaker George Lucas is one of the latest to indicate he’s open to AI in the movie industry. In a recent interview, the director said resistance to the technology was “very much like sitting here saying: ‘Well, I believe the horse and the buggy is really where it’s at. These cars, they break down, they need gas, there’s all kinds of problems with them and pretty soon they’ll be making them into tanks, and then they’ll be killing people. It’s terrible.’” The Guardian story was headlined: “George Lucas likens AI sceptics to luddites clinging to horses and carts.” “Luddites” have sometimes stood in for enemies of progress: those destined to be swept aside in the forward march of history. The label of “neo-Luddism” or “digital Luddite” is also being reclaimed by people concerned about labour conditions, society and democracy in an era of AI expansion twinned with personal profit. Read more: Digital Luddites are rising. They want to democratise tech, not destroy it But who exactly were the Luddites? They were a collective reaction to the traumas of the industrial revolution, in early industrial England. Their legacy has been profound, as suggested by both negative and positive polemics related to them in intellectual and cultural commentary, art and literature and popular histories produced as digital technology continues to grow. When trade unions were illegal As the new political economy, fuelled by transatlantic slavery and colonial extraction, began to transform work practices in England and introduce new forms of mechanization, skilled artisans and weavers resisted. They sought to protect their livelihoods, their ways of life and their communities. Trade unions were illegal and the workers did not have political representation. Co-operative societies did not yet exist and state welfare was a distant dream. The only alternative to acquiescence was what historian Eric Hobsbawm memorably called “collective bargaining by riot.” Food riots, destroying machinery or setting fire to factories were in-your-face ways to get employers and local authorities to pay attention to their legitimate grievances. When the English cartoonist Charles Williams…