Thomas Dekeyser, a lecturer at the University of Southampton, has released a new book examining the historical roots of technology refusal. His latest work, Techno-Negative: A Long History of Refusing the Machine, contextualizes current opposition to artificial intelligence within centuries of similar movements. Dekeyser argues that modern resistance is not a rejection of progress, but a defense of human value against narrow technological definitions. He believes this historical lens clarifies why people are rejecting AI tools and data centers.
According to the author, critics of technology often face accusations of being irrational or fearful of advancement. This label of techno-phobia dismisses the rational reasons people choose to resist harmful dimensions of contemporary life. Dekeyser told Rest of World that refusal allows for alternative imaginations of the future that do not diminish human meaning. He insists that understanding this history prevents the demonization of legitimate concerns.
Historical precedents include medieval monks who banned specific tools and weavers who burned looms during the 17th century. These groups sought to protect their livelihoods and cultural practices from machines that threatened their existence. The church, philosophers, and governments have all historically delayed or rejected technological arrivals that seemed detrimental to society.
The public perception of Big Tech has shifted dramatically as companies abandon progressive facades. Google removed its original slogan Don be evil in 2018 and replaced it with Do the right thing. Dekeyser notes that ethics have vanished into the background as firms embrace authoritarian and nationalistic tendencies openly. The deepening alignment with the Trump administration marks a clear departure from earlier social progress claims.
Recent acts of vandalism against Waymo robotaxis and the destruction of five G towers signal a growing sense of disempowerment. People feel that modern technology serves a few wealthy individuals rather than the collective wellbeing of the many. Material destruction offers a temporary release from the feeling that technological expansion is inevitable and unchangeable.
Resistance in Latin America and Africa is inseparable from ongoing colonial logics within the technology industry. Populations outside the West often function as cheap labor or sources of valuable data while their environments are extracted for infrastructure. This pushback represents a refusal of the afterlives of colonialism embedded in AI data centers. Local communities are increasingly viewing the infrastructure as an extension of imperial control.
Beyond economics, artificial intelligence is reshaping what it means to live a meaningful life in the 21st century. The prevailing narrative suggests an efficient, fast, and intelligent existence is superior to slower human interactions. Many find this promise unconvincing as it threatens community, care, and personal growth.
The philosopher Günther Anders described a feeling of Promethean shame where humans feel insufficient before perfect machines. AI promoters claim that non-adoption results in second-class citizenship for those who refuse to embrace the technology. Dekeyser describes this refusal as a struggle against the idea that machine intelligence defines human worth.
The broader implications suggest a fundamental conflict over the future direction of technological development. Society must decide if progress should prioritize efficiency over human connection and autonomy. Watch for continued organized campaigns as workers and communities demand better, less harmful tech. This struggle will define the relationship between humanity and the machines it creates.
