‘I shouldn’t have to remind you how much of an impact integrated AI technology has on our politics, social norms, and present discussions in general. But humor me anyways: try to think of any literary works that discuss AI or societal-technological relations. You may refer to “I, Robot” or “The Terminator” series, both of which fictionalize scenarios of widespread AI integration, or maybe Ted Kaczynski’s “The Unabomber Manifesto: Industrial Society and Its Future” comes to mind. But none of these works go in-depth into the societal and political implications AI technology might have in the future. So what, or who, does?
To find the answer, go back a century to Bordeaux, France. Jacques Ellul was born there in 1912, and after finishing his education at the universities of Paris and Bordeaux, France was invaded by Nazi Germany in 1940. Ellul served as a leader among French resistance fighters and was awarded Righteous Among the Nations, a title given by Israel to non-Jews, for his efforts to hide Jews from persecution in the Holocaust. Once the war was over and France was liberated again, Ellul got back on track by engaging in more theological-political projects, including the one we care about for this article: “The Technological Society.”
In “The Technological Society,” Ellul explores technology’s relation to human society through a self-defined term he calls the “technique,” or the ultimate rational efficiency humanity will eventually achieve with technological advancements. From there, Ellul further expands this idea of the technique by applying it to aspects of technology that require ultimate efficiency and using it to describe how each aspect could be rationalized in a theoretical technological society, hence the name. This renders the book into somewhat of a political manifesto, advocating ways of organizing and using technology in order to achieve the perfect integrated society.
One of Jacques Ellul’s seven aspects of technology he would like to rationalize is autonomy, or the ability technology will have to make decisions on its own without any direct command, which sounds an awful lot like the future of AI. Ellul emphasizes that if uncontrolled, humanity could be enslaved to this technology, and that it must distinguish “between what we can welcome as legitimate human development and what we should reject with our last ounce of strength as dehumanization.” To translate to non-philosopher English, society must consider how much power and ability it allows AI to have, ensuring it remains regulated by humans and never the other way around.
AI has only gotten bigger, and it’ll continue to get bigger until you can’t avoid a conversation about how much room it’s taking, so take Jacques Ellul’s advice and start having those conversations while we still take enough space.
This piece was originally published in Zephyrus’ print edition on Nov. 6, 2025
