Modern technology has long drawn the ire of everyday people for its potential to disrupt society, dating back to the early 1800s when English workers known as “Luddites” destroyed knitting machines that threatened to automate their roles. The legacy of these skilled textile artisans still resonates with tech skeptics centuries later, giving rise to two increasingly popular approaches for navigating the challenges posed by today’s increasingly ubiquitous devices: Anti-tech and slow tech.
The Anti-Tech and Slow-Tech Movement, Explained
The idea of being “anti-tech” has become associated with the rejection of specific technologies entirely, while “slow tech” refers to limiting when and how technologies are used. Both stances are designed to reduce one’s reliance on modern smart devices, especially features related to artificial intelligence and social media. That said, their main targets are the companies and leaders profiting off these devices, not the technology itself.
Whether they’re reducing their reliance on technology or rejecting it entirely, a growing number of people seem to agree that social media and artificial intelligence have become major societal problems rather than signs of progress. But this resistance is about far more than the technology itself, raising questions about the kind of change anti-tech and slow-tech supporters hope to see — and the direction the tech industry could take if these attitudes go mainstream.
Inside the Shift Toward Anti-Tech and Slow Tech
The concept of “anti-tech” is inspired by the Luddites, who led a labor uprising that regularly attacked textile factories in Nottingham, England. In fact, the term “Luddite” has come to refer to anyone who fights technological change. Anti-tech is then perceived as more of a “resistance movement” against specific technologies that has evolved into a “counter-cultural identity,” according to Jessica Elefante, author of Raising Hell, Living Well, tech critic and founder of Folk Rebellion, a media company promoting digital well-being.
On the other hand, Elefante says that slow tech centers on “mindfulness,” cultivating more intentional interactions with devices by restricting when and how they’re used. It’s a direct response to the so-called “attention crisis” caused by smart devices that distract users with notifications, infinite feeds and online games. Slow tech counters this information overload by calling for changes that literally slow down the digital experience, whether that’s limiting certain features, reducing screen time or having simpler interfaces.
That said, the core issue behind these two approaches is often misunderstood. The Luddites weren’t angry at the knitting machines themselves, but at how factory owners used them to mass-produce cheap products that led to lower wages across the industry. Rather than the technology itself, the Luddites were protesting the exploitative system that used these machines to weaken their labor power and lower their quality of life.
The same is true today, according to David Ryan Polgar, president and founder of All Tech Is Human, a nonprofit that addresses issues at the intersection of tech and society. Rather than the AI models or the social media platforms themselves, anti-tech and slow-tech proponents are upset with the CEOs of these companies and the business models that incentivize digital consumption over digital well-being. They were never really against technology in the first place.
“The people involved in this tech movement, it’s actually because they care so much about technology. It’s because they actually say technology is impacting the human condition and the future of democracy and the future of the workforce,” Polgar told Built In. “And it’s actually just trying to push back against a small minority of folks who are trying to conveniently position it as only in their domain.”
Why Are People Pushing Back Against Technology?
People have become cynical of technology for a variety of reasons, but these are some of the biggest factors fueling anti-tech and slow-tech attitudes.
Mental Health Concerns
The questionable mental health effects of technology are fueling calls for stronger regulation and healthier usage habits. Social media companies, in particular, have long been accused of designing their platforms to encourage compulsive use. Features like infinite scrolling, push notifications, algorithmic content recommendations and videos that play automatically make it difficult for users to tear themselves away, which can ultimately lead to higher risks of anxiety, eating disorders and even suicide according to some research.
And lawmakers have taken notice. In 2024, the Senate Judiciary Committee grilled top executives from companies like Meta, Discord and X about their platforms’ role in promoting bullying, drug abuse and self-harm among children and teens. In one hearing, Senator Josh Hawley, a Republican representing Missouri, actually got Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg to publicly apologize to the families there. Still, several whistleblowers have spoken out publicly against these companies, claiming they knew their products were harming their young users and did nothing to stop it.
U.S. civil courts have also begun holding some of these tech companies accountable, with two landmark decisions finding Meta and YouTube liable for their platforms’ addictive nature and role in facilitating harmful behaviors among minors specifically.
At the same time, mental health professionals are raising alarms about the psychological effects of using AI companions and chatbots like ChatGPT too much. In extreme cases, some people are falling victim to what has become known as “AI psychosis,” where they develop unhealthy emotional attachments to these systems or experience paranoid delusions that, gone unchecked, have led to job losses, divorces, involuntary hospitalizations, arrests and worse. In fact, companies like OpenAI and Character.ai are facing several lawsuits of their own, with families claiming their chatbots mentally and sexually abused their children, and in some cases contributed to their deaths.
Some governments are beginning to respond to these concerns. The United Kingdom and Australia have passed social media bans aimed at protecting youth from the technology’s effects, and the United States could potentially follow their lead. After all, a 2026 Pew Research study found that 56 percent of U.S. adults would support a social media ban for anyone under the age of 16. And around the world, age verification systems are being implemented not just in social media apps, but also in AI chatbots and online gaming platforms.
Job Market Disruption
Workers have come to view artificial intelligence as a key driver of automation that could eliminate their roles, even if it isn’t the clear-cut culprit for mass layoffs quite yet. It doesn’t help that many companies have cited AI as the reason for job cuts, sparking fears that the technology has broken the traditional white-collar career ladder and could cause widespread unemployment in the future — particularly for early-career professionals.
Workers illiterate in AI could be particularly vulnerable to AI agents, systems that can perform complex, multi-step tasks without any human assistance. With agentic AI automating most of the nitty-gritty tasks, teams would only need one or two workers to oversee teams of agents, making many of their colleagues disposable. These possibilities have led to broad anti-AI backlash in some workplaces, and have transformed the technology into a divisive political issue.
Environmental Damage
AI’s massive energy demands have spurred the rapid expansion of data centers, which have been blamed for straining electrical grids and competing with local communities for vital resources like clean water. Residents living near this infrastructure are concerned about its energy needs amid a warming climate, and the Department of Energy even required that data centers use backup generators to free up the mid-Atlantic grid during a July heatwave.
These effects on America’s power supplies have led some states to pursue moratoriums that would delay the construction of new data centers for the time being. In response, tech companies are starting to think outside the box — and outside of this world — with some considering orbital data centers to avoid potential legal and environmental snares on Earth.
Widespread Surveillance
Smart cameras, such as those made by Flock Safety, use AI to scan license plates of moving vehicles, supposedly to aid police investigations. Still, many worry these cameras could be used for mass surveillance. These fears were exacerbated when Amazon Ring announced its partnership with Flock in a Super Bowl ad, which depicted the cameras as tools for neighborhood protection. Instead, the ad elicited a strong critical response, prompting Ring and Flock to end their partnership.
The stakes have only risen higher as the U.S. government seeks unconditional access to the latest AI models. Concerns over surveillance drove a wedge between Anthropic and the Pentagon, prompting OpenAI and Google to include language around barring the use of their models for surveillance in their new defense contracts. That will likely do little to ease Americans’ anxieties as AI becomes a more prevalent part of the government’s tech stack.
Youth Counterculture
College students aren’t the only ones frustrated with pro-AI sentiments, either. Online dating app Hily surveyed 3,500 Gen Z and Millennial users, discovering that 64 percent of Gen Z members — those aged 14 to 29 — wouldn’t date someone who uses AI for everyday decisions, and 60 percent would consider someone “extremely attractive” if they said they never used AI for any personal decisions.
The reality is that social media and AI are no longer novelties for younger generations. Combine this mundaneness with anxieties over job losses and fragmented attention spans, and it makes sense why young people may be souring on these technologies.
“These kids have grown up with this. They know no different than every adult in their world having a blue face, communicating through laptops and computers and screens all the time,” Elefante told Built In. “And as with most kids and most generations, eventually you want opposite of what you’ve ever known.”
How Politics Is Fanning the Flames of Tech Resistance
In the end, all these concerns are tied to the core issue of U.S. politics becoming intertwined with tech companies’ interests. A 2026 survey conducted by the Tech Oversight Project found that 54 percent of American voters believe the Trump administration is too close to tech industry leaders and 49 percent believe Trump is merely “doing Big Tech’s bidding on AI.” Unsurprisingly, a Pew fact sheet showed that just 17 percent of Americans trust the U.S. government to do what is right “just about always” or “most of the time.”
It’s impossible to ignore the president’s business deals, data center initiatives and pro-AI regulations that have contributed to a tech-friendly environment. As a result, the U.S. has witnessed massive investment in AI, enriching a small group of companies and their CEOs, who happen to be some of the richest people on Earth. There’s no better example of this trend than Elon Musk, who briefly became the world’s first trillionaire after his company SpaceX went public. According to Polgar, though, this shift should be expected within a deregulated industry.
“Technology, if you just allow it to be hands-off, is probably going to go in a bad direction because there’s no natural progression of technology. It’s always being controlled by somebody,” he said. “This techno-deterministic worldview — that technology just happens to us — that is a total B.S. argument.”
Indeed, the general public no longer seems to trust that technological advancement is done with them in mind amid this widening wealth gap, and they’re no longer waiting for government and tech leaders to listen to them. More Americans seem willing to express their disapproval of products and policies they perceive as benefiting only the wealthy few, embracing an anti-Big Tech attitude in their attempt to make technology work for them — not society’s elite.
Ways to Address “Fast Tech”
To a degree, tech companies have responded to fears around the frictionless experience of “fast tech” sapping attention spans. Screen time apps like Opal and Freedom let users block websites and apps and offer incentives for exercising restraint. Brick takes it a step further, requiring users to tap their phones on a physical device to unlock apps they’ve chosen to block.
But those solutions only introduce more apps and devices into users’ lives. Here are a few slow-tech alternatives that replace smart devices altogether, including several that Elefante has found helpful for herself and her family:
- Dumb Devices: Dumb devices are stripped-down versions of products that support only basic functions like calling and messaging. Examples include Keyphones, Gabb watches, Wisephones and Light phones.
- Vintage Tech: Older TVs with DVD and VCR systems, iPods and MP3 players are a few older products that can substitute for smart devices and streaming services.
- Analog Media: Subscriptions to physical copies of newspapers, magazines and other publications can reduce the need for digital media.
- DIY Projects: Cyberdecks are mobile computers built by hobbyists with spare parts and single-board systems like Raspberry Pi. This allows for creative, customized designs that emphasize specific workflows without unnecessary, distracting features.
Such practices strike a personal chord for Elefante, a mother of two. Especially as the parallels between the social media and tobacco industries grow more prominent, shielding her children from the effects of too much screen time remains top of mind.
“For me, every year that I give them without this influence, this manipulative — I would say it’s a weapon — the more they have time to develop character, to develop values, to develop friendships, to develop hobbies,” Elefante said. “So that when it comes for them, which of course it will, hopefully those things have a stronger pull than the screen addiction.”
Where Do We Go From Here?
The potential impacts of social media and AI on youth have stoked stronger initiatives to rein in these technologies, with parents now aiming to return classrooms to a fully analog experience. Elefante believes these efforts could spread among all age groups, inciting a full-on anti-tech movement as more people explore life without smart devices.
“I think you’re going to see a large group of people start to truly try to live without — and that’s the word I keep coming back to is ‘without.’ Just seeing what they can get away with-out, whether it is a phone or an email address or a laptop,” Elefante said. “Because it has become unsustainable and untenable, but you add AI and it’s now become dangerous.”
Even if the backlash against Big Tech reaches such extremes, Polgar still thinks things could play out positively. Anti-tech and slow-tech attitudes could spark society-wide discussions around how to address technologies like social media and AI, bringing together a range of stakeholders under a broad coalition. This group could work together to shape modern tech that prioritizes the needs of everyday people rather than the pocketbooks of CEOs.
“Technology is something that impacts everyone, so everyone deserves a seat at the proverbial table,” Polgar said. “So we’re creating a system to actually say, ‘Our values need to be embedded in our tech future,’ and more importantly, ‘Our tech future is not predetermined. It is being decided from us, the people, and we are going to tilt it in a direction that benefits the most Americans.’”
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the main difference between “anti-tech” and “slow tech”?
“Anti-tech” refers to outright rejecting specific technologies, while “slow tech” refers to setting boundaries around when and how technologies are used. As a result, anti-tech can sometimes be viewed as an identity or a social movement, while slow tech describes digital practices that prioritize mindfulness. Both approaches are becoming increasingly popular as more people seek to lessen their reliance on screens and smart devices.
Who were the original Luddites, and how do they relate to the “anti-tech” movement?
The Luddites were English textile workers who started a labor uprising in the early 1800s, attacking knitting machines that were automating their jobs. A common misconception is that they were angry at the machines, when they were actually targeting the factory owners for using these machines to lower their wages. The term “Luddite” has since come to be associated with resisting technological progress in general, but it more specifically refers to pushing back against tech used for exploitation — a tradition carried on by anti-tech and slow-tech proponents today.
Why are people pushing back against AI and social media?
People are turning against artificial intelligence and social media for various reasons, including:
- Screen addiction.
- AI-driven automation leading to job losses.
- Environmental effects of data centers.
- Suspicions of AI being used for mass surveillance.
- Youth counterculture pivoting from AI and social media.
What alternatives can people use to reduce their screen time?
Instead of using smart devices, people can turn to these alternatives to reduce their screen time and digital distractions:
- “Dumb devices” that offer only basic functions, such as calling and texting.
- Vintage technologies like MP3 players, iPods and TV sets with DVD and VCR systems.
- Analog media like physical newspapers, journals and magazines.
- DIY projects that involve designing tech products from scratch with spare parts.
