The article traces the 1810s Luddite movement of skilled textile workers who anonymously threatened and destroyed machinery to halt automation, highlighting their decentralized structure, community backing, and ultimate government crackdown. It then argues why copying this violent, cell-based approach makes little sense for today’s anti-AI campaigners.

• Luddite success came from decentralized cells and communities that refused to inform, not from centralized organization—even 12,000 troops and rewards worth 40x annual wages couldn't crack it until a local police state emerged.
• Despite ultimate defeat, Luddism delayed machinery installation for years in some towns, won wage concessions, and pushed the government toward early labor reforms like child-labor laws.
• The violent, anonymous-threat-then-sabotage playbook that worked against localized 1810s mill owners doesn't map well onto today's fight against AI datacenters (implying different tactics are needed now).