I'm not sure I understand the point you are making. Are you saying if there are too many technological advances, the 'bottom' population will uprise? And you mention industrial revolution as a case in point? Please clatify if I'm mistaken...
The industrial revolution did not seek the advancement of mankind, but mostly the financial advancement of a few fortunate wealthy 'barons'. I think the your comment`s Parent is meant to signify that if we stop focusing on fear and the spread of violence and instead focus on solutions which are all inclusive, we would be better off (this I agree with).
He's not saying if there are too many, he's saying if it happens too fast. If all of our cars became self-driving tomorrow, and the American Trucker Association's estimates are correct [1], then 3 million truck drivers will suddenly be out of of jobs.
We live in the real world so change doesn't happen overnight, but if truck driving becomes out-moded significantly faster than a truck driver could learn a new skill, then the displaced population will riot because they worked hard and did nothing wrong their whole lives and machines replaced them anyway.
And this is true for nearly all blue-collar and some white-collar workers, whose jobs would be threatened by advancements and automation made in their sector
Yep, it's not about technology, more about concentration of power and its effects on society. Technological advancements are massive opportunities for power grabs.
