I wouldn't. The idea wasn't abstract in the 1830s. It meant the difference between having a loom in your house and working at a mill. We could debate the importance of this, but we'd be starting by talking about an actual thing that is happening in the world. You could talk to a mill worker about it and it described their life.

You can't think of relevant ways of describing alienation, because the thing you are trying to describe isn't happening now. It happened hundreds of years ago. All that's left is a psycho-economic abstraction and a history lesson.

Say I coin a term to describe the digitisation of workplaces, WFH, and such. Call it "workplace etherealisation." We can use that in "analysis" of labour-capital dynamics. In 200 years, "workplace etherealisation" and our analysis probably won't mean anything anymore. Or rather, it will be a trivial, clunky way of describing the world from the perspective of past people.

That was my initial point. This article isn't written to have meaning to amazon workers, or readers beyond a particular circle. It's written to have meaning "in-theory," deep inside abstract theories that the author is interested in for abstract treasons that have nothing to do with workers. It's mastabatory.