Culture can have a powerful impact on technology, and the automotive industry has created a cultural problem for itself that could prove existential. There is a backlash against new cars growing in the garages, on the driveways and in the YouTube comment sections of a generation that might be expected to embrace the latest technologies. Although EVs are far from the only culprits/victims, they are emblematic of the digital modernity that is provoking rebellion, writes Peter Donaldson.

(This concern is not limited to car nerds, and is passionately expressed in a video entitled ‘Old Cars & The Analog Resistance’ on a YouTube channel called ‘The War on Beauty’.)

Perhaps unintentionally, the industry has taken the automobile – long an icon and enabler of personal freedom in much of the Western world – and turned it into a symbol of corporate greed, debt peonage and dystopian control. Fair or not, that impression is influencing younger Gen-Y (Millennials) and Gen-Z buyers to eschew new and nearly new cars for older, more analogue machines.

They are repelled by five-figure down payments for vehicles that depreciate heavily, come loaded with – perhaps buggy – software that depends on frequent over-the-air patches, and, in some cases, is prone to remote deactivation by the OEM, government or even hackers.

When these young adults express growing interest in cars from the 1960s through the early 2000s, they are making a rational economic and philosophical choice. They want cars that are paid off, cars they can fix themselves or take to a local independent mechanic, and cars that cannot be shut down remotely. This is a rebellion against fragility, planned obsolescence and the creeping sense that ownership is becoming a fiction – epitomised by OEMs charging subscriptions for access to features built into the car.

Engineering realities are fuelling this distrust. Industry has designed components – headlights, ADAS sensors, electronic parking brakes – that cost thousands to replace after minor fender-benders. Parts consolidation has reached the point where a single failed module can ‘brick’ a vehicle or put it beyond economic repair. Wear-and-tear items like water pumps and alternators are increasingly inaccessible, low-friction ‘wet belts’ fail prematurely and many components that used to be serviceable are now throwaway items. Worse, independent mechanics increasingly find themselves priced out of the repair loop, requiring dealer-level diagnostic tools and ECU coding for even basic part swaps. This is the logical endpoint of a business model that seeks to monetise every interaction and eliminate the ‘third tier’ of ownership – buyers who rely on cheaper used cars, DIY mechanics, independent garages mechanics and aftermarket spares suppliers.

And then there is the data. New vehicles are now roving surveillance platforms, capturing phone contacts, navigation history, driver behaviour and even cabin video. This data is sold to insurers, third-party marketers and governments. The industry has normalised this, but customers are waking up to the fact that the car they bought is also a spy they cannot turn off.

While EVs are not the only offenders, they are ground zero for these trends. Being inherently software-defined, they amplify every anxiety – from battery health and BMS complexity to the fear of a single electronic failure rendering a costly asset worthless.

Some of this is mandated by government. ADAS features, emissions regulations and safety standards are non-negotiable. But industry has gone far beyond compliance; instead, choosing complexity over clarity, control over openness and recurring revenue over enduring value.

Automotive manufacturers face a choice. They can continue down this path, dismissing the backlash as a niche concern, or re-examine their design philosophy. They can build EVs with modular, repairable electronics, offer full diagnostic access to owners and independent shops, and stop treating customers as data sources and start treating them as partners.

The technology is brilliant and the engineering world-class. But the trust of an entire generation is at stake, and automakers are at risk of building the most sophisticated cars that nobody actually wants to own. For the industry, engineering a better relationship is surely preferable to engineering its own obsolescence.