Can Gen Z Create a New World?

The generation that inherited the problems, questioned the system, and now dreams of rewriting the future.

By Your Costly Smiles

Every generation inherits a world it did not create. But what happens when the generation that inherits it decides it no longer wants to live by its rules?

Imagine a world where your degree does not guarantee a job, your salary does not guarantee a home, your hard work does not always guarantee success, and your voice does not always reach the people making decisions about your future.

Imagine growing up watching world leaders talk about peace while conflicts continue, governments promise development while inequality persists, and societies celebrate progress while millions struggle to afford the basics.

Now imagine being told that you are the future of this world.

What would you do?

Accept it? Adjust to it? Or question why things have to be this way?

For many young people today, these questions are no longer abstract thoughts. They are becoming part of everyday conversations, online debates, political movements, and protests.

Across different countries, young people are raising concerns about corruption, unemployment, economic inequality, freedom, and political accountability. Their circumstances differ, and they do not all share the same ideology. But many are asking a similar question:

If the world we inherited is not working for us, why should we accept that it cannot be changed?

This brings us to a bigger question.

Can Gen Z create a new world?

Or is the dream of changing the world simply another beautiful idea that reality will eventually destroy?

At Your Costly Smiles, I believe the answer begins with understanding what creating a new world actually means.

1. Gen Z Did Not Create This World. But Gen Z Will Have to Live in It.

Every generation inherits something from the one before it.

Some inherit wealth, stability, and opportunity. Others inherit debt, inequality, environmental damage, political divisions, and economic uncertainty.

Gen Z, broadly understood as those born between 1997 and 2012, has grown up during a period of rapid technological change, globalisation, economic disruption, and intense digital connectivity.

It has witnessed extraordinary technological progress. Information is more accessible than ever. People can communicate across continents within seconds, learn new skills online, and build careers that previous generations could hardly have imagined.

Yet technological progress has not eliminated insecurity.

Many young people still worry about employment, housing, financial independence, discrimination, and the future of the planet.

This creates a strange contradiction.

We live in a world that can send a spacecraft into deep space, develop artificial intelligence, and connect billions of people digitally. Yet many communities continue to struggle with basic needs and unequal access to opportunity.

Of course, the world has also made significant progress in medicine, education, living standards, and technology. The past was not a perfect world that we somehow lost.

But progress in one area does not erase the problems that remain in another.

And young people are increasingly asking why the benefits of progress are not shared more fairly.

Perhaps the real frustration is not that the world has failed to advance.

Perhaps it is that the world has advanced enough to make us imagine something better, but not enough to make that better world accessible to everyone.

That is a powerful starting point for change.

2. A Generation That Can See the World Cannot Easily Ignore It

Previous generations also challenged injustice. Students, workers, civil rights activists, and democratic movements helped reshape societies long before social media existed.

Gen Z did not invent protest, resistance, or the desire for freedom.

What makes its experience different is the environment in which it has grown up.

A young person in one country can witness a demonstration in another, learn about a political scandal thousands of kilometres away, and participate in a global discussion without leaving home.

Social media has made information easier to access and public grievances easier to share.

It has also made comparison almost unavoidable.

Young people can compare wages, living costs, educational opportunities, public services, and political freedoms across countries.

They can see how other societies address certain problems and ask why similar solutions are not possible at home.

This exposure can encourage awareness, solidarity, and new ideas.

But it also has a darker side.

Social media can exaggerate differences, spread misinformation, and make other people's lives appear far more successful than they really are. A viral video can generate outrage before the facts are established.

Therefore, access to information is not the same as understanding.

A generation may have more information than any before it and still struggle to distinguish facts from manipulation.

If Gen Z wants to create a better world, it must develop more than digital skills.

It must develop the ability to question information, examine evidence, understand history, and listen to perspectives that challenge its own.

A connected generation can spread an idea across the world. An informed generation can decide whether that idea deserves to change the world.

3. The Global Protests Are About More Than Anger

When young people take to the streets, it is tempting to describe them as impatient, rebellious, or unwilling to accept reality.

Sometimes, protest movements do contain confusion, unrealistic expectations, or competing interests. Not every demand is equally reasonable, and not every movement offers a convincing solution.

But dismissing youth protests as mere rebellion misses something important.

In many cases, young people are demanding greater accountability, fairer opportunities, better public services, and a meaningful voice in decisions that affect their lives.

They are asking whether institutions can respond to the challenges of the present rather than simply defend the arrangements of the past.

Their immediate demands differ from country to country.

Yet the underlying questions can be remarkably familiar:

Why should corruption go unpunished?

Why should economic opportunity depend so heavily on privilege?

Why should young people spend years preparing for careers that may not provide financial security?

Why should citizens have to struggle to make institutions listen?

These are not exclusively Gen Z questions. They are questions that every society must confront.

But when a generation begins to feel that its future is being decided without its participation, dissatisfaction can become collective action.

Protest can expose problems, bring neglected issues into public debate, and pressure governments to respond.

However, a protest alone cannot build a functioning economy, improve every school, eliminate corruption, or create trustworthy institutions.

That requires planning, public participation, effective policies, and long-term accountability.

And this is where the question of a new world becomes more interesting.

Can a generation that knows what it wants to change also decide what should replace it?

That is the real test.

4. What Does a New World Actually Mean?

Before creating a new world, Gen Z must answer a fundamental question:

What kind of world are we trying to create?

A new world does not necessarily mean destroying every existing institution, rejecting every tradition, or treating everything associated with older generations as outdated.

Some institutions preserve important rights. Some traditions provide identity and belonging. Some established systems work well and deserve to be improved rather than abandoned.

The goal should not be change for the sake of change.

The goal should be meaningful improvement.

Imagine a world where:

• A person's opportunities depend less on family wealth and personal connections.

• Education prepares students for life, work, and responsible citizenship.

• Employment offers dignity, fair treatment, and a reasonable path towards independence.

• Political leaders are held accountable for their decisions.

• Technology serves humanity rather than exploiting people's attention or vulnerabilities.

• Differences in religion, culture, identity, and opinion do not become excuses for hatred.

• Economic development does not come at the expense of the planet's future.

• Mental health is taken seriously rather than dismissed as weakness.

• Freedom of expression is protected while people remain responsible for the consequences of their actions.

• Success is measured not only by wealth and status but also by well-being, fairness, and the quality of our communities.

This is not a complete blueprint for society. People will disagree about how to achieve these goals, and some will disagree about the priorities themselves.

But it provides a starting point for a serious conversation.

A new world should not simply look different.

It should work better for the people living in it.

And that means Gen Z must do more than identify what is broken. It must participate in developing practical, fair, and sustainable alternatives.

5. Can Gen Z Change the System Without Becoming the System It Opposes?

This may be the most difficult question of all.

History is full of movements that began with promises of justice, equality, and freedom.

Some achieved extraordinary progress. Others lost momentum, became divided, or allowed new concentrations of power to emerge.

The problem is not unique to young activists.

It is a recurring challenge in politics and human behaviour.

People may oppose corruption while supporting it when it benefits their own group. They may demand freedom of expression while trying to silence their critics. They may condemn privilege while seeking special treatment for themselves.

A movement's ideals are important, but ideals alone cannot prevent hypocrisy.

If Gen Z wants to create a better world, it must be willing to apply its principles consistently.

If it demands accountability from politicians, it must also demand accountability from leaders within its own movements.

If it demands fairness, it must treat people fairly even when they disagree.

If it opposes misinformation, it must refuse to spread false claims that support its preferred cause.

If it demands democratic participation, it must respect the rights of people whose opinions are unpopular.

And if it wants to challenge established power, it must recognise that power can corrupt people of any age.

The age of a leader does not determine the quality of their leadership. Their actions do.

A younger government is not automatically a better government. A young activist is not automatically correct. An older person is not automatically resistant to progress.

The real question is whether people are willing to build systems that limit the misuse of power, regardless of who occupies positions of authority.

A new world cannot be built simply by changing the people at the top.

It must also change the rules, incentives, and habits that allow the same problems to return.

6. Gen Z Has a Powerful Tool: Technology. But Technology Is Not a Solution to Everything.

Gen Z has grown up alongside smartphones, digital platforms, and increasingly sophisticated technologies.

Artificial intelligence, online education, digital entrepreneurship, and global communication offer opportunities that were unavailable to many previous generations.

A young person can learn from leading institutions, start a small business, publish research, develop software, or organise a community initiative without needing the resources that such activities once required.

These opportunities matter.

Technology can lower barriers to participation and help people develop solutions to local problems.

Young innovators can work on renewable energy, healthcare access, agricultural productivity, financial inclusion, and educational tools.

Digital platforms can help communities coordinate disaster relief, raise awareness, and share valuable knowledge.

But technology can also deepen existing problems.

Automation may disrupt employment. Digital platforms can concentrate economic power. Personal data can be exploited. Artificial intelligence can reproduce bias or spread misleading content.

Access to technology is also unequal. Not every young person has reliable internet, quality education, financial resources, or the freedom to experiment.

Therefore, the challenge is not simply to create more technology.

It is to ensure that technological progress serves public interests and expands meaningful opportunities.

A society does not become fair merely because its services become digital.

Nor does a person become informed simply because they can ask an artificial intelligence system a question.

The important issue is how these tools are designed, governed, distributed, and used.

Gen Z has an opportunity to shape those decisions.

But that opportunity comes with responsibility.

Technology can give a generation new powers. Wisdom determines what it does with them.

7. The Biggest Battle May Not Be Against the World. It May Be Against Ourselves.

It is easy to blame governments, institutions, wealthy individuals, previous generations, or the economic system for everything that feels wrong.

Sometimes criticism is entirely justified. Institutions must be examined, power must be questioned, and wrongdoing must be addressed.

But a generation cannot build a better society by treating itself as incapable of making mistakes.

Gen Z faces its own challenges.

The pressure to appear successful online can create insecurity. Constant comparison can make ordinary life feel inadequate. The pursuit of visibility can reward controversy over understanding.

Online discussions can become competitions in which the objective is not to find the truth but to humiliate the other person.

People can become so attached to their political identities that they stop questioning information that confirms their beliefs.

And the desire for immediate change can make slow, necessary work feel pointless.

These problems do not define an entire generation. Many young people are thoughtful, compassionate, hardworking, and deeply engaged in their communities.

But no generation is immune to the weaknesses of human nature.

Creating a new world therefore requires personal change as well as institutional change.

It requires the patience to learn, the humility to admit mistakes, the courage to challenge one's own beliefs, and the discipline to work towards goals that may take years to achieve.

A generation that wants to change society must also be willing to examine how it treats people in everyday life.

Do we respect workers who serve us?

Do we treat people with dignity when they cannot offer us anything in return?

Do we listen when someone challenges our opinions?

Do we use our freedom responsibly?

Do we care about problems that affect people outside our immediate circle?

These questions may seem small compared with global politics.

But societies are made up of everyday decisions repeated by millions of people.

We cannot build a more humane world using the same habits of cruelty, dishonesty, and indifference that made the old one difficult to live in.

8. What Can Gen Z Actually Do to Create a New World?

A global vision becomes meaningful only when people begin turning it into action.

Not everyone needs to become a politician, activist, entrepreneur, or public intellectual.

Change requires people with different abilities working towards different goals.

Here are six ways Gen Z can contribute.

1. Become informed citizens, not merely informed spectators.

Read beyond headlines. Understand the history of the issues you care about. Compare credible sources. Learn how public institutions work and how decisions are made.

Do not confuse having an opinion with understanding a problem.

A strong argument is not simply one that sounds convincing. It is one that can withstand questions and evidence.

2. Turn anger into practical demands.

If you are concerned about unemployment, investigate the causes and possible solutions.

If you are concerned about corruption, understand the relevant laws, oversight mechanisms, and accountability processes.

If you are concerned about education, identify what needs improvement and how progress can be measured.

A complaint identifies a problem.

A well-developed proposal begins the process of solving it.

3. Participate in democracy beyond election day.

Voting matters, but citizenship does not end when the results are announced.

People can attend public meetings, engage with elected representatives, support independent journalism, participate in community organisations, and monitor public decisions.

Peaceful protest is one legitimate form of civic participation, subject to applicable laws and circumstances.

But meaningful participation also requires listening, compromise, and the willingness to work with people who do not share every belief.

4. Build things, not just opinions.

Create businesses that solve real problems.

Develop educational resources.

Support local organisations.

Conduct research.

Design useful technologies.

Help people access services.

Build communities where people can cooperate across differences.

Not every solution needs to begin with a national movement.

Sometimes, a small initiative that genuinely improves people's lives is more valuable than a thousand online arguments about changing the world.

5. Demand accountability from everyone, including your own side.

Do not excuse wrongdoing simply because the person responsible supports your preferred cause.

Do not spread unverified claims because they help your argument.

Do not confuse loyalty with refusing to ask questions.

A better society requires standards that apply consistently, even when applying them is uncomfortable.

6. Think beyond your own generation.

Creating a new world does not mean declaring war on everyone who came before you.

Older generations contain people with valuable experience, knowledge, and insight. Younger generations bring different experiences, questions, and ideas.

Neither group has a monopoly on wisdom.

A meaningful future can be built through cooperation between generations, while still allowing young people to challenge decisions that deserve criticism.

The objective is not to prove that one generation is superior.

It is to make sure that each generation leaves the world in better condition than it found it.

9. Will Gen Z Actually Succeed?

There is no guarantee.

History does not move automatically towards progress. Technology does not guarantee justice. Youth does not guarantee wisdom. And a movement's popularity does not guarantee that its proposals will work.

Gen Z may achieve important reforms in some countries and face disappointment in others.

Some movements may become lasting political forces. Others may fragment or lose public support.

Some young leaders may build effective institutions. Others may reproduce the same failures they once criticised.

The future will depend on many factors, including economic conditions, political institutions, public participation, international developments, and the choices made by people of all ages.

But uncertainty is not a reason for hopelessness.

It is a reason to take responsibility.

Gen Z does not have to solve every global problem to make a meaningful difference.

It does not need to eliminate every form of injustice to improve the lives of millions of people.

It does not need to agree on everything to cooperate on something important.

The goal should not be perfection.

It should be measurable progress, supported by institutions that can sustain it.

A world with more accountable governments, better educational opportunities, stronger public services, fairer access to work, and greater respect for human dignity would already be a significant improvement.

And those changes become more possible when people move beyond asking whether the world can change and begin examining how it can.

10. Perhaps the New World Begins With a Different Question

For a long time, society has asked young people a familiar question:

What do you want to become when you grow up?

A doctor? An engineer? An entrepreneur? A scientist? An artist?

These questions matter.

But perhaps there is another question we should be asking:

What kind of world do you want to help create?

Because a person's success is influenced by the society in which they live.

A talented student needs an education system that supports learning. An entrepreneur needs an environment in which ideas can become useful products and services. A worker needs fair conditions. A citizen needs institutions that respect their rights.

Individual effort matters enormously, but people do not succeed in isolation.

We depend on communities, public infrastructure, institutions, natural resources, and the contributions of countless others.

A generation that understands this relationship may begin to see success differently.

Success is not only about escaping a difficult system.

It can also mean improving the system so that fewer people are trapped by the same difficulties.

It is not only about finding a place in the world.

It is about helping create a world in which more people have a fair chance to find their place.

That is a much bigger ambition than personal success alone.

And it may be one of the most important questions Gen Z can ask itself.

---

Final Thoughts: Can Gen Z Create a New World?

Yes, Gen Z can help create a new world.

But not because it is younger, more technologically advanced, or automatically wiser than the generations before it.

It can help create a new world because every generation has the opportunity to question inherited assumptions, identify problems, develop new ideas, and contribute to the institutions that shape society.

The real question is whether it will use that opportunity wisely.

Will it choose understanding over misinformation?

Cooperation over unnecessary division?

Accountability over blind loyalty?

Long-term progress over temporary popularity?

Will it build institutions rather than simply criticise them? Will it protect the rights of people who disagree? Will it recognise that the pursuit of justice requires consistency, patience, and a willingness to learn?

These choices will matter far more than the label attached to a generation.

And we must remember something important: creating a better world is not Gen Z's responsibility alone.

Governments, businesses, educational institutions, communities, and older generations all have roles to play.

Young people should have a meaningful voice in decisions about their future, but they should not be expected to repair every problem that society has accumulated over decades.

They deserve support, opportunity, and institutions willing to respond to their ideas.

Perhaps the new world will not arrive through one revolution, one election, one invention, or one extraordinary leader.

Perhaps it will emerge through millions of decisions: a teacher who changes how students learn, a scientist who develops a useful solution, a citizen who refuses to tolerate corruption, a business that treats its workers fairly, a community that protects its most vulnerable members, and a young person who chooses to build something meaningful rather than surrender to cynicism.

These actions may not always make headlines.

But together, they can change the direction of a society.

A new world does not begin when an entire generation agrees on everything. It begins when enough people decide that the problems they inherited do not have to become the problems they pass on.

So, Gen Z, the question is not whether you are capable of imagining a better world.

You already are.

The question is whether you are willing to do the difficult, imperfect, everyday work required to build it.

Because protesting against the old world may be the beginning.

Imagining a better one may be the inspiration.

But building it?

That is where your generation's real story will be written.

And perhaps, years from now, the world will not remember Gen Z simply as the generation that questioned everything.

It will remember what that generation chose to do with its questions.

Your Costly Smiles — Because the future is not merely something we inherit. It is something we help create.

---

Let's talk

Do you believe Gen Z can create a genuinely better world, or will it eventually face the same challenges that defeated previous generations?

What is the one thing you would change about today's world if you had the power to do so?

And most importantly, what are you willing to do to make that change happen?

Share your thoughts. The future deserves more than passive spectators. It deserves people willing to think, participate, and build.

 

Gen Z Is Protesting Worldwide: A Generation That Refuses to Stay Silent

From Kathmandu to Belgrade, from Nairobi to Paris — what is pushing the world's youth onto the streets?

By Your Costly Smiles

We were told to study hard, get good jobs, work honestly, and build a better future. But what happens when the future we were promised starts feeling like a privilege rather than a possibility?

Something is happening across the world.

Young people are stepping out of classrooms, colleges, homes, and offices to challenge governments, question political leaders, and demand a future they believe is slipping away.

In some countries, their anger is directed at corruption. In others, it is about unemployment, expensive housing, poor education, inequality, restrictions on freedom, or political systems that seem unwilling to listen.

The locations are different. The languages are different. The political circumstances are different.

Yet a familiar feeling runs through many of these movements: the feeling that decisions are being made about young people's futures without giving young people enough say in them.

The year 2025 saw a significant wave of protests across continents, with several youth-led movements continuing into 2026. In October 2026, Reuters reported a fresh wave of youth protests across European countries, including France, Italy, Belgium, and Albania. These developments followed major youth mobilisations in countries such as Bangladesh, Nepal, Kenya, Indonesia, and Serbia.

But are we witnessing the beginning of a global youth revolution?

Or are we simply watching different generations of young people express the same frustration through different political struggles?

To understand what Gen Z is protesting against, we must look beyond the crowds, hashtags, and viral videos.

We must understand the anger beneath them.

1. What Is Really Happening? The World Is Different, but the Frustration Feels Familiar

Calling every youth protest a single global movement would be misleading.

The protests in Nepal did not begin for precisely the same reasons as those in Serbia. The concerns of young people in France are not identical to those of students in Indonesia. Every country has its own political history, economic circumstances, and immediate triggers.

However, research on the recent wave of youth mobilisation points to recurring themes: corruption, economic insecurity, inequality, exclusion from political power, and frustration with established institutions.

Consider some important examples.

Nepal: When political restrictions meet deeper frustration

In September 2025, protests in Nepal erupted after the government imposed a ban on major social media platforms. The demonstrations grew into a wider confrontation over corruption, political accountability, and public dissatisfaction.

The protests resulted in the resignation of Prime Minister K. P. Sharma Oli amid deadly unrest. Yet a change in leadership did not automatically resolve the country's deeper political and economic problems.

The lesson is important: an immediate government decision can trigger a protest, but the anger behind it may have been building for years.

Indonesia: Anger over privilege and accountability

In Indonesia, student-led demonstrations in 2025 challenged lawmakers' privileges and perceived corruption. The protests reflected frustration over the contrast between the privileges enjoyed by political elites and the economic pressures faced by ordinary people.

For many young people, the issue is not simply whether politicians make mistakes. It is whether those in power are held accountable for them.

Serbia: From protest to political participation

Serbia's student movement emerged from public outrage following a deadly railway-station canopy collapse in Novi Sad in November 2024. Students demanded accountability and challenged what they saw as systemic corruption.

By October 2026, the movement had achieved a major electoral breakthrough. Reuters reported that student-led mobilisation helped bring about the electoral defeat of long-time leader Aleksandar Vučić's political camp.

This example illustrates how a movement can evolve beyond demonstrations and become a force in electoral politics.

Europe: The future is becoming increasingly expensive

In October 2026, Reuters reported youth protests across France, Italy, Belgium, and Albania. The concerns included the cost of living, poor school facilities, housing affordability, limited employment opportunities, and perceived corruption.

The economic pressures are significant. According to figures cited by Reuters, 40% of Europeans aged 16–30 identified living costs as a concern, while 26.3% of EU residents aged 18–24 faced poverty or social exclusion in 2025.

These examples demonstrate that youth protests cannot be reduced to one ideology or one demand.

They are better understood as a series of movements responding to different local problems, some of which share common structural causes.

And that brings us to the bigger question.

Why does a generation with more access to information than almost any generation before it feel so disconnected from the institutions governing its life?

2. The Broken Promise: Study Hard, Work Hard, Succeed

For decades, young people have been told that education is the road to security.

Study hard. Get a degree. Find a job. Become financially independent. Buy a home. Build a family. Contribute to society.

It is a familiar formula.

But for many young people, the path from education to economic security has become uncertain.

A degree does not necessarily guarantee a suitable job. A job does not always guarantee financial independence. And earning a salary does not necessarily mean being able to afford a home in the city where you work.

Housing costs, insecure employment, inflation, and concerns about future opportunities have become major sources of frustration in many societies. Recent research on Gen Z protests identifies economic precarity as one of the recurring factors behind youth mobilisation.

Imagine spending years preparing for a career, accumulating qualifications, and following every instruction society gives you, only to discover that the opportunities you expected remain out of reach.

The disappointment is not merely financial.

It can also become emotional and political.

Young people may begin asking whether the system genuinely rewards effort, whether connections matter more than competence, and whether the people making decisions understand the difficulties they face.

Of course, these experiences are not universal. Many young people find fulfilling careers, achieve financial security, and participate in institutions they trust.

But where economic pressure combines with visible privilege and a perceived lack of accountability, individual frustration can become collective anger.

The question changes from:

Why am I struggling?

To:

Why are so many people struggling while those in power appear insulated from the consequences?

That is when an economic problem can become a political movement.

3. Corruption Is Not Just About Money. It Is About Trust.

Corruption is often discussed in terms of stolen public funds, bribery, or financial misconduct.

But its effects can reach much further.

When people believe that public resources are being misused, that influential individuals receive preferential treatment, or that institutions protect the powerful rather than serve the public, trust begins to deteriorate.

For young people, this can be particularly damaging.

They are preparing to enter the workforce, compete for opportunities, pay taxes, and participate in public life. They want to believe that their efforts will matter.

If they begin to feel that connections outweigh competence, that accountability depends on political influence, or that rules apply differently to different people, the promise of a fair society becomes difficult to believe.

Research by Harvard Kennedy School identifies corruption, exclusion from political power, and economic insecurity as important drivers of the recent wave of youth protest.

This helps explain why corruption-related protests can attract people who disagree on many other issues.

A student looking for employment, a young professional struggling with housing costs, and a citizen concerned about public services may not share the same political ideology.

But they may agree on one principle:

Public power should come with public accountability.

That common ground can bring different groups together.

It can also become a source of division if a movement cannot agree on what accountability should look like in practice.

Because demanding a fair system is one thing. Building one is another.

4. The Digital Generation Has Taken Its Anger Offline

Gen Z grew up in a world where information travels almost instantly.

A video recorded in one city can reach millions of people in another country within hours. A protest slogan can cross language barriers. Footage of alleged misconduct can trigger public debate before traditional news outlets have completed their reporting.

Digital platforms can help young people discover common concerns, coordinate activities, share evidence, and draw attention to issues that might otherwise receive little coverage.

Research on recent youth movements highlights the importance of decentralised organisation and digital communication in making mobilisation faster and harder for authorities to contain.

But there is something deeper happening here.

Social media has changed not only how young people communicate, but also how they compare their lives with those of others.

A young person may see the cost of education in one country, unemployment in another, and political privilege in a third. They can compare experiences that previous generations might never have encountered.

This does not mean that seeing another country's protest automatically causes a local uprising. Political circumstances, existing organisations, and local grievances still matter.

However, digital communication can help young people recognise patterns in their experiences.

They begin to realise that the difficulties they face may not be entirely personal failures.

And when a local grievance finds an audience that understands it, the movement can grow.

But social media has another side.

A viral video is not necessarily complete evidence.

A trending hashtag does not tell us how representative a movement is. A dramatic clip may leave out the events that preceded it. False claims can spread alongside legitimate grievances.

Online popularity can also create the illusion that everyone agrees with a movement when public opinion is actually divided.

The same platforms that help people organise can spread misinformation, expose protesters to surveillance, and amplify calls for confrontation.

Therefore, the digital generation faces a responsibility that is just as important as its ability to mobilise:

The responsibility to verify before sharing, understand before judging, and think before following the crowd.

Technology can spread a movement.

It cannot, by itself, establish whether every claim made by that movement is true.

5. What Makes Gen Z Protests Different?

Young people have always protested.

Students and young activists played important roles in anti-colonial struggles, civil rights campaigns, democratic movements, and demands for social change long before smartphones existed.

It would be historically inaccurate to suggest that protest, political awareness, or resistance began with Gen Z.

What is changing is the environment in which many of these movements organise.

First, mobilisation can happen much faster.

Digital networks allow information to circulate rapidly, helping people coordinate demonstrations and communicate across geographical boundaries.

Traditional organisations are not necessarily disappearing, but a movement can now gain visibility before it develops a formal leadership structure.

Second, movements can operate without a single recognised leader.

Many contemporary youth protests rely on decentralised networks rather than conventional political hierarchies.

This can make them more flexible and allow people with different backgrounds to participate.

However, the same structure can make it difficult to choose representatives, negotiate agreements, or establish a common long-term strategy.

Third, the language of protest has changed.

Internet culture, humour, memes, popular entertainment, and shared visual symbols can help communicate political messages.

These tools may make complex issues more accessible, particularly to younger audiences.

But catchy slogans can also oversimplify serious problems. A movement needs more than an effective message; it needs a credible understanding of the issue and a realistic plan for addressing it.

Fourth, young people are challenging institutions without necessarily trusting the alternatives.

This may be the most important difference.

A protester can be deeply dissatisfied with the current government without supporting a particular opposition party. Someone can demand democratic accountability while distrusting established political institutions.

This creates a powerful but complicated situation.

It is easier to agree that something is wrong than to agree on what should replace it.

That is the central challenge facing many leaderless movements.

6. What Is the Global Narrative? A Generation Demanding Dignity, Not Just Power

If we examine these protests together, a common narrative begins to emerge.

It is not that all young people want the same government, the same economic system, or the same political ideology.

It is that many want greater control over their future and a stronger voice in decisions that affect their lives.

Four demands appear repeatedly.

Economic dignity: The opportunity to earn a living, access education, find meaningful work, and build a secure future.

Political accountability: Institutions that explain their decisions, investigate wrongdoing, and treat public power as a responsibility rather than a privilege.

Fairness: A belief that opportunities should not depend excessively on family connections, political influence, or inherited wealth.

Representation: The ability to influence decisions rather than being treated as a generation that must simply accept what older or more powerful groups decide.

These themes appear across the research on contemporary youth protest, although their importance varies from country to country.

What makes this narrative significant is that it connects everyday experiences with larger political questions.

An unaffordable apartment becomes a question about economic priorities.

A lack of jobs becomes a question about opportunity and public policy.

An alleged corruption scandal becomes a question about accountability.

A decision made without meaningful consultation becomes a question about representation.

In this sense, the protests are not simply about young people wanting to replace older leaders.

They are also about whether existing institutions can respond to the expectations of a changing society.

And this is where the global narrative becomes particularly important.

Gen Z may not be united by one political programme, but many young protesters are united by the belief that the existing arrangement is not delivering what they were promised.

That is a powerful starting point for collective action.

It is not, however, a guarantee of agreement about the solution.

7. The Impact: Can Gen Z Actually Change the World?

The short answer is yes.

But the longer answer is more complicated.

Protests can influence political decisions, force public investigations, increase pressure on institutions, change public conversations, and help mobilise voters.

In some circumstances, they can contribute to the removal of political leaders.

Yet the success of a protest should not be measured solely by the size of a crowd or the number of days a movement remains in the headlines.

We need to examine its consequences.

Impact One: Governments can be forced to respond.

Large demonstrations can make it politically difficult for governments to ignore public dissatisfaction.

Authorities may face pressure to explain their decisions, reverse controversial measures, investigate allegations, or negotiate with protesters.

Nepal's 2025 protests, for example, were followed by the prime minister's resignation. Serbia's student-led movement later achieved a significant electoral breakthrough in October 2026.

These developments show that protest can create political consequences.

However, the outcome depends on the country's institutions, the demands of the movement, the response of the authorities, and the ability of protesters to maintain public support.

Not every protest produces concessions, and not every concession leads to lasting reform.

Impact Two: Issues that were once ignored become impossible to ignore.

One of the most important achievements of protest is the ability to change public attention.

An issue that received little coverage can become a national conversation. People who previously felt isolated may realise that others share their concerns.

Media organisations, civil society groups, political parties, and public institutions may be compelled to address demands that were previously neglected.

This does not mean that greater visibility automatically produces better policy.

But without public attention, many grievances struggle to gain political priority.

Impact Three: Young people can become political participants rather than spectators.

Protest can introduce young people to organising, public debate, policy questions, and collective decision-making.

Some may later participate in elections, community organisations, advocacy groups, or political institutions.

Others may become more critical of existing institutions or decide that traditional political channels are ineffective.

Either way, protest can change how people understand their role as citizens.

Harvard Kennedy School's analysis notes that youth participation in nonviolent campaigns is associated with important democratic outcomes, while also warning that protest success does not necessarily translate into improvements in young people's economic circumstances.

This distinction matters.

Political change and economic change are related, but they are not identical.

Impact Four: The cost of protest can be painfully high.

Protesters may face arrest, violence, injury, or other serious consequences.

Governments may restrict demonstrations, impose penalties, or respond with force. In some cases, peaceful movements can be disrupted by violent confrontations.

Families, students, workers, and local communities may also bear economic and social costs.

Research on contemporary youth movements has documented serious repression in several countries.

These risks should not be used to dismiss legitimate demands for change.

Nor should they be romanticised as though suffering itself guarantees success.

A responsible movement must consider the safety of participants, maintain peaceful discipline, understand applicable laws, and recognise that people have different capacities to accept personal risks.

Courage does not require ignoring consequences.

It requires understanding what is at stake.

8. The Biggest Risk: What Happens After the Protest Ends?

Imagine a movement succeeds in forcing a leader to resign.

The crowds celebrate. Videos circulate around the world. Supporters declare victory.

But what happens the next morning?

Who manages public institutions?

Who develops policies to improve employment?

Who investigates allegations of corruption?

Who ensures that public services work better?

Who prevents new leaders from repeating the behaviour that caused the protests in the first place?

These are not minor questions. They determine whether political mobilisation produces meaningful improvements in people's lives.

Harvard Kennedy School's analysis of Gen Z protests highlights the danger that movements may achieve immediate political victories without resolving the deeper grievances that brought people into the streets.

There are several reasons why this can happen.

A lack of a shared programme: People may unite against a leader without agreeing on the policies needed after that leader leaves.

Weak organisational structures: Decentralised movements can struggle to appoint representatives, negotiate with authorities, and make decisions that participants consider legitimate.

Political co-option: Established political actors may attempt to use a movement's popularity to advance their own interests.

Unrealistic expectations: Structural problems such as unemployment, inequality, and corruption cannot always be solved quickly, even when political leadership changes.

Fragmentation: Differences over ideology, priorities, and strategy can divide a movement once its immediate objective has been achieved.

The lesson is not that young people should stop protesting.

It is that protest must connect to a longer process of reform.

A movement needs credible demands, transparent decision-making, mechanisms for accountability, and a way to evaluate whether promised changes actually happen.

Otherwise, the faces in power may change while the underlying problems remain.

Removing a leader can be a political victory. Building a system that no longer depends on the character of a single leader is a much bigger achievement.

9. Is Gen Z Against the System, or Is It Asking the System to Work?

There is a temptation to describe the current wave of youth protest as a rebellion against everything established.

That description misses an important distinction.

Some protesters seek fundamental political transformation. Others want existing institutions to become more accountable, democratic, effective, or responsive.

Some focus on economic policy. Others prioritise freedom, public services, or corruption.

These positions are not interchangeable.

Nor is every young person dissatisfied with the political system. Many participate in elections, work through established organisations, support particular political parties, or prefer gradual reform to street mobilisation.

Nevertheless, there is an important question behind the protests:

What happens when people continue to participate in a system but lose faith that the system will respond to them?

When peaceful appeals appear ineffective, some people may turn to more disruptive forms of protest.

That does not make every demand justified or every tactic acceptable. It does, however, make it important for governments and institutions to understand the reasons behind public dissatisfaction rather than simply dismissing the people expressing it.

Listening does not mean agreeing with every demand.

It means taking grievances seriously enough to examine the evidence, explain decisions, and provide meaningful avenues for accountability.

A healthy democracy should be able to withstand criticism.

Indeed, the ability to respond to criticism constructively is one of the ways democratic institutions demonstrate their strength.

10. And What About India? Does This Global Story Matter to Indian Youth?

Absolutely.

India has its own political, economic, and social circumstances. The experiences of young Indians cannot simply be equated with those of protesters in Nepal, Serbia, or European countries.

But the broader questions raised by the global protest wave are relevant to India as well.

How can education better prepare young people for employment?

How can young people access fair opportunities regardless of their social or economic background?

How should governments respond to concerns about recruitment, examinations, corruption, and public accountability?

How can citizens distinguish between legitimate protest, political mobilisation, and misinformation?

And how can young people participate in democracy without allowing political parties, online personalities, or peer pressure to determine what they believe?

These are questions that deserve serious discussion.

India has constitutional protections for freedom of speech and expression and the right to assemble peacefully and without arms, subject to the reasonable restrictions permitted by the Constitution. Peaceful protest is an important democratic avenue, but participation must be informed by the applicable law and circumstances.

For Indian youth, the lesson from global movements should not be to imitate another country's protest simply because it has become popular online.

It should be to understand the underlying issues, examine evidence, identify what needs to change, and choose the most effective and responsible way to pursue that change.

Sometimes that may mean joining a peaceful demonstration.

Sometimes it may mean organising locally, engaging with elected representatives, supporting public-interest journalism, participating in student organisations, or voting.

These methods can complement one another.

The point is not to import another country's anger. It is to develop the awareness and confidence to address our own challenges.

11. Should Gen Z Protest, Then?

My answer is that young people should have the freedom to protest peacefully when they believe there is a legitimate reason to do so.

But participation should be a decision based on understanding, not merely emotion.

Before joining a movement, ask yourself:

• Do I understand the issue beyond what I have seen on social media?

• Are the movement's claims supported by credible evidence?

• Are its demands clear, achievable, and consistent with my values?

• Does it respect the rights and safety of others?

• What would meaningful success look like?

• What should happen after the immediate demand is addressed?

These questions do not weaken a movement.

They help distinguish informed participation from following a crowd.

Young people should also recognise that protest is not the only measure of political awareness. Someone who cannot safely attend a demonstration may still contribute through research, community work, public discussion, voting, or other lawful forms of participation.

At the same time, people should not dismiss a protest merely because its participants are young, emotional, or unfamiliar with traditional political structures.

The quality of a movement should be judged by its evidence, demands, methods, and conduct—not by stereotypes about the generation participating in it.

The world does not need young people who automatically oppose everything.

It needs young people who can recognise what is wrong, understand why it is wrong, and work towards something better.

12. The Future Belongs to Gen Z—but Responsibility Comes With It

There is a powerful contradiction at the heart of this moment.

Young people are demanding accountability from institutions, yet they must also learn how to build institutions that remain accountable after a movement succeeds.

They are demanding fairness, yet they must make space for people who disagree with them.

They are challenging established power, yet they must guard against the possibility that new leaders will misuse the power they acquire.

They are asking governments to listen, yet they must also learn to listen to one another.

This is the real test of political maturity.

A generation cannot build a more democratic society merely by replacing one set of powerful people with another. It must also create habits of transparency, participation, evidence-based debate, and respect for individual rights.

And it must recognise that meaningful change is often slower than a viral video, more complicated than a slogan, and less dramatic than a revolution.

The most important work may begin when the crowds disperse and the cameras turn away.

It is the work of monitoring institutions, examining policies, supporting independent scrutiny, participating in elections, organising communities, and holding leaders accountable over time.

That work may not always trend.

But it is essential.

Final Thoughts: The World Is Listening. What Will Gen Z Say Next?

Perhaps the most significant feature of this global protest wave is not that young people are angry.

Young people have always had reasons to be angry.

It is that, in many countries, their frustrations are increasingly finding collective expression—and that they are demanding to be treated as participants in their societies rather than passive recipients of decisions made by others.

Their concerns deserve to be taken seriously.

Their demands deserve to be examined fairly.

Their rights deserve protection.

But their movements must also confront a difficult truth: being heard is the beginning of change, not the completion of it.

A protest can expose a problem. It can force a conversation. It can challenge a government and sometimes contribute to a political transformation.

But creating a fairer society requires more than the ability to bring people into the streets.

It requires the ability to build, reform, participate, and remain accountable long after the streets are empty.

For Gen Z, the challenge is not simply to prove that the old systems can be questioned.

It is to help build systems that deserve people's trust.

And for governments, the challenge is equally clear: a generation asking for dignity, opportunity, and accountability cannot be answered indefinitely with silence.

Because when young people begin to believe that their future is being decided without them, their frustration becomes more than a personal feeling.

It becomes a question about the legitimacy and responsiveness of the institutions that govern their lives.

The world is watching this generation.

But the real measure of its influence will not be how many protests it starts.

It will be how much meaningful, lasting change it helps create.

Because the ultimate purpose of protest is not to keep a generation angry. It is to build a world in which that generation has fewer reasons to be.

---

A question for our readers

At Your Costly Smiles, we believe that meaningful conversations begin when people are willing to question, listen, and think beyond easy answers.

So, we want to ask you:

Is Gen Z witnessing a global political awakening, or is it experiencing a crisis of trust in the institutions meant to serve it?

Can street protests bring lasting change, or must young people find ways to turn their demands into long-term political and social reform?

And perhaps the most important question of all:

If the next generation is brave enough to challenge the world, is the world ready to listen?

Share your thoughts. Let's debate the ideas, question the assumptions, and keep the conversation going.

Your Costly Smiles — Because behind every smile is a story, behind every silence is a thought, and behind every generation is a future worth fighting for.

 

Should Yuva Go for a Protest or Not?

When raising your voice becomes more important than staying silent

By Your Costly Smiles

There comes a moment in every young person's life when silence starts feeling heavier than speaking up. You see injustice around you, hear promises that remain unfulfilled, watch people struggle for their rights, and wonder: Should I raise my voice, or should I stay away from the crowd?

This is a question many young people face today. Should yuva—the youth of our country—participate in protests, or should they focus on their studies, careers, and personal growth?

My answer is simple: Yes, the youth should stand up for what is right, but they must understand what they are standing for.

Why should the youth protest?

Youth is not just an age group; it is a force capable of changing society. Young people bring fresh ideas, courage, energy, and the willingness to question things that older generations may have accepted as normal.

History has shown us that many social changes began when ordinary people refused to remain silent. Protests have helped people demand justice, equality, better working conditions, democratic rights, and accountability from those in power.

When students raise concerns about education, when young people demand employment opportunities, or when citizens stand together against injustice, they remind society that democracy is not just about casting a vote. It is also about making our voices heard.

If the youth remain silent about every problem, who will question the system? Who will demand accountability? And who will build the society they dream of living in?

A generation that never questions anything may inherit a world it never wanted.

But is every protest worth joining?

Here is where we need to pause and think.

Not every protest has a clear purpose. Not every movement represents the complete truth. And not every person holding a placard necessarily understands the issue behind it.

Sometimes, emotions overpower facts. Sometimes, political interests use young people's energy for their own benefit. And sometimes, people join a crowd simply because their friends are going, because a video is trending, or because staying away feels unpopular.

Is that awareness, or is it just following the crowd?

Before joining a protest, every young person should ask a few important questions:

• What is the actual issue?

• Are the demands fair, reasonable, and based on facts?

• Who is organising the protest, and what do they want to achieve?

• Is there a peaceful and lawful way to participate?

• Am I joining because I believe in the cause, or because someone has influenced me?

These questions do not make you less courageous. They make you a more responsible citizen.

Protest versus personal responsibility

A common argument is that young people should not waste their time protesting and should instead focus on their studies and careers.

But why must we choose between building our future and protecting our society?

Education gives us the ability to think critically. A career can give us independence. And civic participation allows us to help shape the world in which we live.

These things are not enemies of one another.

At the same time, a protest should not become an excuse to neglect every other responsibility. Young people must consider their safety, academic commitments, family circumstances, and the possible consequences of their participation.

You do not have to attend every protest to prove that you care. You can also contribute by educating yourself, writing about an issue, contacting elected representatives, supporting affected communities, participating in lawful campaigns, or encouraging meaningful dialogue.

Courage is not measured by how loudly you shout or how long you stand in a crowd. Sometimes, courage is the willingness to understand the truth when everyone around you has already chosen a side.

Peaceful protest is a democratic right—and a responsibility

In a democracy, peaceful protest can be a powerful way to express disagreement and demand change. But the right to express ourselves comes with the responsibility to respect the rights and safety of others.

Violence, destruction of public property, harassment, and spreading misinformation can weaken a genuine cause and harm innocent people.

A meaningful protest should focus on the issue, not on hatred. It should question decisions without turning every disagreement into a personal battle. It should seek solutions rather than simply create chaos.

Young people must also remember that laws and restrictions governing demonstrations can vary by location and situation. Understanding the applicable rules and choosing safe, peaceful methods of participation are important parts of responsible activism.

We should not confuse aggression with courage or silence with wisdom.

What if you choose not to protest?

Does staying away mean that you do not care?

Not necessarily.

Some people contribute through research, journalism, community service, legal advocacy, public discussion, or voting. Others may have personal circumstances that make attending a demonstration difficult or unsafe.

What matters is whether you remain aware, think independently, and contribute in a meaningful way when you can.

However, repeatedly ignoring injustice simply because it does not affect us personally is a different matter. Today, someone else may be struggling for a right; tomorrow, we may need others to stand up for ours.

We do not all have to stand in the same place, but we should not lose our sense of responsibility toward one another.

The real question is not whether the youth should protest

Perhaps we are asking the wrong question.

Instead of asking, “Should the youth go for a protest or not?” we should ask, “How can the youth recognise a just cause and respond responsibly?”

The answer begins with awareness. Read beyond headlines. Check facts before sharing information. Listen to people with different perspectives. Understand the demands being made. Consider the likely impact of your actions. And when you decide to participate, do so peacefully and with a clear purpose.

The future belongs to the young, but the future is not built by energy alone. It requires patience, knowledge, courage, empathy, and responsibility.

My final thoughts: Raise your voice, but use your mind

Dear yuva, your voice matters. Your questions matter. Your dreams and your concerns deserve to be heard.

Do not let fear silence you when something genuinely needs to change. But do not let anger, peer pressure, or political manipulation decide your actions either.

Stand for justice, not merely for a crowd. Stand for facts, not rumours. Stand for humanity, not hatred.

If a protest is peaceful, lawful, based on a cause you understand, and aligned with your values, participating can be a meaningful expression of citizenship. If the purpose is unclear, the information is unreliable, or your safety is at serious risk, take a step back, learn more, and consider other ways to contribute.

Because the goal is not simply to protest.

The goal is to create a society where fewer people have to protest for the rights they should already enjoy.

And perhaps that is what being young truly means—not blindly following the world as it is, but having the courage and wisdom to help make it better.

Your Costly Smiles believes that a voice backed by awareness can be more powerful than a thousand voices driven by confusion.

What do you think?

Should today's youth participate in protests, or should they focus on changing society through other means? Is protesting a sign of courage, or does courage also mean knowing when and how to act?

Share your thoughts in the comments. Let's have a conversation—not a fight.

Your Costly Smiles — Because every voice has a story, and every thought deserves a chance to be heard.