cultivar_22_Final_EN

36 ANALYSIS AND PROSPECTIVE STUDIES CULTIVAR Issue 22 APRIL 2021 new technology will destroy a lot of jobs. But it will also create a lot of jobs.” 4 The solution to the shortage of labour, jobs destruc- tion, or destruction offset by new jobs creation? CNN is unsure. Except for those who believe they can predict the unpredictable – the nature and conse- quences of adopting technologies that have not yet been tested or even invented – nobody knows for sure. We do not know if we are witnessing a wave of technol- ogy comparable in its effects to the ones experienced in the past, such as those stem- ming from the invention of the steam engine, electricity and combustion engine. We do know, however, that it is not the first time that technological innovation and the consequences of the adoption of new technologies in work and employment have occupied a prominent place in the public debate. We also know that the “old” contro- versies, tempered by real lived historical experience, may often bring more light to current debates than the unfounded and often deluded speculation that fills the newspapers today. In the expectation that this is true, i.e. that it is possible to learn from the debates and experiences of the past, I first propose in this short article to revisit an “old” controversy about the consequences of technology on work and employment. Then I will examine the predictions of past theories in the light of real lived experience and, third, provide a short reflection on the teachings that result from the first two. 4 “Jack Ma: We need to stop training our kids for manufacturing jobs”, by Julia Horowitz, 20 September 2017, CNNTech. http://money.cnn.com/2017/09/20/technology/jack-ma-artificial-intelligence-bloomberg-conference/index.html 5 On this subject, see Couto, J. M.; Garcia, M. F.; Freitas, C. E.; Silvestre, R. C. (2011), “Desemprego tecnológico: Ricardo, Marx e o caso da indústria de transformação brasileira (1990-2007)”, Economia e Sociedade , vol. 20, no. 2. http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0104-06182011000200004 The origins 18th and 19th century Britain is where we should look if we want to reconstruct the origins of the debate about the consequences of technology on work and employment. 5 That is where, in 1779, we find the legendary Ned Ludd destroying a sock-knit- ting machine, as well as very real repeated episodes of workers destroying machines. Rebellions by industrial work- ers against mechanisation and unemployment in Britain reached its height in 1811– 1819 with the so-called Lud- dite movement. The move- ment became so widespread and so alarming that in 1812 the British government, under pressure from indus- trialists, passed the Frame-Breaking Act establishing the death penalty for people accused of destroying machinery. In the same year, following the destruc- tion of a factory in the county of York, 64 workers were arrested and 13 sentenced to death. After 1819, the influence of the Luddites waned in the factories but grew in the countryside. Between 1830 and 1833, in episodes in the South and East of Britain called the Swing Riots, farm workers destroyed mechani- cal threshers. Although contemporaries of these dramatic events, the first political economists, for whom the use of machinery was above all regarded as providing a virtuous increase in human productive capacity, looked on with complacency. We do know, however, that it is not the first time that technological innovation and the consequences of the adoption of new technologies in work and employment have occupied a prominent place in the public debate. 18th and 19th century Britain is where we should look if we want to reconstruct the origins of the debate about the consequences of technology on work and employment.