Unless you're defining "correct" as "stopped the development of a disruptive technology", which would be, of course, ignorant.
Edit: The post I'm replying to was edited to redefine the context to be the defense of Luddites specifically for destroying machines. I may have used different words/tone in that case, but my opinion is still qualitatively the same. Just know I am speaking holistically.
Edit: To be more specific (and less snide): Inevitability does not making something universally good, and people negatively affected are correct and justified to react negatively.
Sorry, I felt it necessary to clarify my point. The Luddites were justified in asking for a share of the fruits of their labor, just as as any of of us are, but in a larger sense their attack on the machinery of progress was an attack on just that... progress.
How is your position distinguishable from any other phrasing of the broken-window fallacy? Humans shouldn't aspire to do a robot's job. We have better things to do.
Unless you're defining "correct" as "stopped the development of a disruptive technology", which would be, of course, ignorant.
Edit: The post I'm replying to was edited to redefine the context to be the defense of Luddites specifically for destroying machines. I may have used different words/tone in that case, but my opinion is still qualitatively the same. Just know I am speaking holistically.
Edit: To be more specific (and less snide): Inevitability does not making something universally good, and people negatively affected are correct and justified to react negatively.