Graduation ceremonies “hacked” by anti-capitalist and technocritical speeches, serial desertions and retraining of young engineers in search of meaning: a wind of protest is blowing among young engineers and in their Grandes Ecoles. On these often isolated campuses, mostly populated by boys trained to become a small elite actively sought after by corporations, new debates are taking place about the place of technology in the fight against climate change. How did young engineers become politicized? Antoine Bouzin, a former engineer who became a doctoral student in sociology at the Center Emile-Durkheim (University of Bordeaux), gives some explanations.
Between the critical discourse, in November 2018, of Clément Choisne, a young graduate of Centrale Nantes, and that of the “agro bifurcators” of AgroParisTech in April, nearly four years have passed, and the malaise of young engineers seems to be worsening . How can these tensions be explained?
My hypothesis is that in these spaces that are engineering schools, there are theoretical and conceptual premises that are no longer explained. It is obvious that all progress remains good in itself and necessarily implies social progress. This axiom is no longer debated, it is even in bad taste to question it and it can make you look eccentric.
During an interview conducted as part of my research on the ecological commitment of engineers, an engineer doing a thesis on low-tech shared with me ” disgust ” what his subject inspired in the members of his laboratory. However, this myth of progress – which was constructed to legitimize the modernization of society – has always been questioned. The revolt of the Luddites [des artisans anglais du textile qui, en 1811-1812, se sont attaqués aux machines à tisser] constitutes in this respect an almost archetypal struggle.
Throughout the XXe century, intellectuals have questioned this implicit, such as Jacques Ellul, Ivan Illich or Bernard Charbonneau. Among engineers, an idea is gaining ground: the political and economic measures taken in recent years to respond to the urgency of the crisis have not been effective..
In his graduation speech, Clément Choisne, very critical of the capitalism of “overconsumption”, concluded with “I doubt and I digress”. Four years later, the “agro bifurcators” have the will to point out the chain of responsibilities, and to cite the list of “culprits”: capitalism, techno-solutionism, senior executives, science and technology… It is as if the relationship to science was once again being discussed, whereas the notions of technological progress had been indisputable until now.
You have 64.3% of this article left to read. The following is for subscribers only.