Luddites was the precursor to the labor movement, I never dispute this.
It's the attempt made to label someone as "liberal" because they didn't know that Luddites was/is used as a pejorative, to someone who clearly has not stated they identify as such.
Which is just absurd, like labeling someone as a supporter of imperialism because they didn't know that royal means "of having the status of a king or queen or a member of their family".
Not only that but to then also indirectly insinuating this is because they are essentially too sheltered/spoiled to understand the value of goods.
Specifically:
>I understand your point of view if you're from a first-world country and you never experienced the terror of having people interfering with the means of production.
Despite the original poster never stated something that would highlight such a point of view, beyond admitting not knowing the definition/use of a word.
It's the attempt made to label someone as "liberal" because they didn't know that Luddites was/is used as a pejorative, to someone who clearly has not stated they identify as such.
Which is just absurd, like labeling someone as a supporter of imperialism because they didn't know that royal means "of having the status of a king or queen or a member of their family".
Not only that but to then also indirectly insinuating this is because they are essentially too sheltered/spoiled to understand the value of goods.
Specifically:
>I understand your point of view if you're from a first-world country and you never experienced the terror of having people interfering with the means of production.
Despite the original poster never stated something that would highlight such a point of view, beyond admitting not knowing the definition/use of a word.