Recent STEM grads are facing a unique dilemma as they navigate the post-graduation landscape. After years of hard work and dedication to their math degrees, many find themselves at a crossroads, deciding between pursuing further education or diving headfirst into the corporate world. The allure of high-paying jobs at major corporations like big banks, tech giants, and pharmaceutical companies is strong, drawing in young graduates with promises of interesting challenges and comfortable salaries.
One particular government agency, known as the “department of government efficiency” (Doge), has caught the attention of many recent grads. With a vibe more akin to a Silicon Valley startup than a traditional government entity, Doge is staffed with a new generation of technocrats who are reshaping the landscape of DC. These young professionals, dubbed the “crypto-obsessed love-children of Musk and Donald Trump,” are driving change and innovation in unexpected ways.
While the right-leaning graduates seem to have found their niche in the tech and financial industries, left-leaning grads are struggling to find their place outside of academia. The progressive movement has historically failed to tap into the technical talent of STEM students, leaving many feeling adrift in a sea of conservative job opportunities. The divide between industry and academia leaves little room for those who want to use their skills for progressive causes.
The recruitment tactics of industries like finance and tech have a significant impact on the career paths of STEM students. Early targeting of students as early as freshman year can shape their perceptions of what is possible outside of academia. As a result, many STEM students find themselves drawn to lucrative careers in the private sector, with limited exposure to progressive job opportunities.
The rise of technical ideologues among STEM students has further deepened the divide between the sciences and humanities. From high school competitions to college courses, students are encouraged to prioritize technical skills above all else. Problem-solving frameworks rooted in programming and economics dominate the curriculum, leaving little room for alternative perspectives. This narrow focus on technical solutions has paved the way for right-leaning technocrats to seize power and push their agenda forward.
As the technocrat right gains momentum, a luddite left is emerging in response. Grassroots organizers, activists, and academics are increasingly wary of technology, viewing it as a tool of oppression rather than empowerment. The lack of effort from progressive organizations to recruit tech-savvy individuals has left a void in the fight against the right’s technological dominance.
To counter the rise of the technocrat right, American progressives must rethink their approach to technology and recruitment. By engaging with engineers and technologists, progressive movements can harness the power of technology to challenge existing power structures and drive real change. It’s time for today’s engineers to dream again and use their skills to turn the master’s tools against him.
In a rapidly evolving technological landscape, the future of progressive movements hinges on their ability to adapt and innovate. By embracing the potential of technology and recruiting a diverse range of technical talent, progressives can reshape the narrative and reclaim their place in the fight for social justice.