As said by Malcolm Thomis, “Luddism did at least indicate that there was a working-class had a voice which they could demand to be heard, or an ‘alternative political economy to be considered” (Thomis, 172). However, after the conclusion of the Luddite movement, there was no recognizable change in the views or laws of Parliament and the upper-class on the working class. Additionally, though the Luddist movement was said to be “a manifestation of working-class culture of greater independence and complexity than any known in the previous century,” (Thomis, 173) there was no newly established pattern of working-class behavior or participation in future affairs. After the Luddite movement had ended, there were no recognizable changes due to Luddism on the economy, working-class participation in affairs, or political
As said by Malcolm Thomis, “Luddism did at least indicate that there was a working-class had a voice which they could demand to be heard, or an ‘alternative political economy to be considered” (Thomis, 172). However, after the conclusion of the Luddite movement, there was no recognizable change in the views or laws of Parliament and the upper-class on the working class. Additionally, though the Luddist movement was said to be “a manifestation of working-class culture of greater independence and complexity than any known in the previous century,” (Thomis, 173) there was no newly established pattern of working-class behavior or participation in future affairs. After the Luddite movement had ended, there were no recognizable changes due to Luddism on the economy, working-class participation in affairs, or political