There's quite a lot of powerful writing in the general realms of technology criticism, some of it more strident than elegant, and much of it pretty sanctimonious. Some is remarkably eloquent, and Wendell Berry is a prime example.

Here's a passage from the beginning of The Unsettling of America (HD1761 .B47):

We can understand a great deal of our history... by thinking of ourselves as divided into conquerors and victims. in order to understand our own time and predicament and the work that is to be done, we would do well to shift the terms and say that we are divided between exploitation and nurture...

Let me outline as briefly as I can what seem to me the characteristics of these opposite kinds of mind. I conceive the strip-miner to be a model exploiter, and as a model nurturer I take the old-fashioned idea or ideal of a farmer. The exploiter is a specialist, an expert; the nurturer is not. The standard of the exploiter is efficiency; the standard of the nurturer is care. The exploiter's goal is money, profit; the nurtuter's goal is health --his land's health, his owon, his family's, his community's. Whereas the exploiter asks of a piece of land only how much and how quickly it can be made to produce, the nurturer asks a question that is much more complex and difficult: What is its carrying capacity? (That is: How much can be taken from it without diminishing it? What can it produce dependably for an indefinite time?) The exploiter wishes to earn as much as possible by as little work as possible; the nurturer expects, certainly, to have a decent living from his work, but his characteristic wish is to work as well as possible. The competence of the exploiter is in organization; that of the nurturer is in order --a human order, that is, that accomodates itself both to other order and to mystery. The exploiter typically serves an institution or organization; the nurturer serves land, household, community, place. The exploiter thinks in terms of numbers, quantities, "hard facts; the nurturer in terms of character, condition, quality, kind. (pp 7-8)

Thus we can see growing out of our history a condition that is physically dangerous, morally repugnant, ugly. Contrary to the blandishments of the salesmen, it is not particularly comfortable or happy. It is not even affluent in any meaningful sense, because its abundance is dependent on sources that are being rapidly exhausted by its methods. To see these things is to come up against the question: Then what is desirable?

One possibility is just to tag along with the fantasists in government and industry who would have us believe that we can pursue our ideals of affluence, comfort, mobility, and leisure indefinitely. This curious faith is predicated on the notion that we will soon develop unlimited new sources of energy: domestic oil fields, shale oil, gasified coal, nucler power, solar energy, and so on. This is fantastical because the basic cause of the energy crisis is not scarcity; it is moral ignorance and weakness of character. We don't know how to use energy, or what to use it for. And we cannot restrain ourselves. Our time is characterized as much by the abuse and waste of human energy as it is by the abuse and waste of fossil fuel energy... (pp 12-13)

Berry quotes Thomas Jefferson, from a letter written two weeks before his death:
...the great mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately, by the grace of God...

Cultivators of the earth are the most valuable citizens. They are the most vigorous, and they are tied to their country, and wedded to its liberty and interests by the most lasting bonds...

I consider the class of artificers as the panders of vice, and the instruments by which the liberties of a country are generally overturned. (pp 143-144)