Gen-Z: An Agent of Change?

Gen-Z, the population born between 1997–2012 constituting around 30 per cent in the workforce as well as in the electorates, has acquired significance as it is believed that having come of age during the Global Financial Crisis 2008, amid rapid growth of technology, and the Pandemic, this cohort is well informed and has the potential to effectively influence social, political and economic developments in the world. According to Cat Ward, vice president of Jobs for the Future, Gen-Z is moulded by a lot of transformative forces, including political gridlock, racial reckoning, climate crisis, and the rise of artificial intelligence. Gen-Z is a vocal and proactive generation with regard to issues like climate change, mental health, racial equity, gun control, and economic inequalities, unemployment, etc., and is often seen confronting the established order by galvanising collective action through social media.

However, what role will Gen-Z play in the sociopolitical narrative of today’s fast-changing world is an open-ended question.

According to some, Gen-Z is a force to be reckoned with, as it holds leaders accountable, as seen in many global youth-led uprisings against corruption, debt, and governance failures. The Aragalaya protest movement in Sri Lanka in 2022 hit the headlines when thousands of angry youths attacked the Presidential Palace, unleashed vandalism, and forced the President to flee the country. After three years, in 2025, a similar story repeated in Bangladesh, where thousands of youths attacked the Prime Minister’s house, resulting in PM Sheikh Hasina fleeing and a new regime of Gen-Z’s choice taking over. In Nepal, systemic corruption in high offices, nepotism, and a ban on social media platforms caused massive violent outbursts on the streets, claiming more than 70 lives. The parliament was set on fire, and the constitutional government collapsed, not to mention lawmakers and ministers being thrashed on the streets. In Kenya, corruption, high taxes, and education funding cuts triggered widespread clashes in June-July 2025 as youths were mobilised via social media. However, these countries are poor examples of the evolution of democratic institutions, and as such, characterising Gen-Z as a sort of revolutionary force, or an agent of political change in the instant context, could be a hasty conclusion.

A finding by Pew Research is that, unlike the Millennials (born between 1981 and 1996) – who came of age during the Great Recession – this new generation inherited a strong economy with record-low unemployment. But that has all changed as COVID-19 reshaped the social, political, and economic landscapes of countries, leaving Gen-Z with an uncertain future. Now the generation is motivated by a strong desire for change in terms of inclusivity and equal opportunities. Social media played a catalytic role. In the early 2000s, text messages mobilised the second People’s Power Revolution in the Philippines, while in 2010, Twitter propelled the Arab Spring and Occupy Wall Street campaigns. The Black Lives Matter Movement was echoed in protests in around 60 countries with the active participation of youth. More than 40 per cent of demonstrations in the US on the Israel–Palestine conflict since October 2023 were by students. Most campuses in the US have centres like UC San Diego’s Center for Student Involvement.

The unrest in Gen-Z is believed to be mostly due to factors such as corruption, institutional failures, and lack of accountability in public offices. But the weakness of Gen-Z’s activism is that it is largely leaderless. A rudderless ship, it is more often than not a free-for-all street show, often with violence and vandalism as its modus operandi. It has neither a clear ideological force behind it nor a streamlined organisation to sustain the movement for long. Moreover, it has no road map for the future course of action after overthrowing an establishment or demolishing an institution. For example, in Nepal, after the collapse of the government, a political vacuum appeared. The Army stepped in, and an ex-Chief Justice was appointed as caretaker PM, as an out-of-the-box solution. It was benevolent of the Army that rather than usurping the vacant throne as often happens in a neighbouring country, it facilitated a smooth transition of power.

According to Jason Richmond, Founder and Chief Culture Officer of Ideal Outcomes, Inc. (Author of Culture Ignited: 5 Disciplines for Adaptive Leadership), every generation of workers has been stereotyped in some way or another. Baby Boomers (born between 1946 and 1964) have been described as resistant to change and the learning of new technology. Some have labelled Generation-X (born between 1965 and 1980) as “apathetic” or “cynical.” And Millennials have been branded as being “entitled” and “job-hoppers.”

As a matter of fact, every generation is an improved version of its predecessor and challenges certain vestiges of the old order. It is not just Gen-Z; all generations faced issues like unemployment, corruption in high offices, and injustice. The 1960s Civil Rights Movement, the anti-Vietnam War protests, the 1989 Velvet Revolution in Czechoslovakia, and the 1940s White Rose resistance in Nazi Germany are some key examples. Now, Gen-Z is better equipped thanks to phenomenal progress in science and technology inherited from earlier generations. However, studies show that Gen-Z, unlike older generations, expects the government to solve problems rather than businesses and individuals. At times, such expectations lead to violent clashes.

Violence and demolition of popular institutions can neither be justified nor condoned. Moreover, violent movements never yielded the intended results. During the French Revolution of 1789, angry masses attacked the Palace of Versailles, seized King Louis XVI and Queen Marie Antoinette, and eventually guillotined both. Ironically, when the bloody revolution was aimed at achieving ‘Freedom, Liberty and Equality’ for the people, it subsequently paved the way for a monarch and emperor — Napoleon — to seize power. Let’s also not forget that in China, Mao Zedong, when sidelined by Liu Shaoqi and Deng Xiaoping due to his catastrophic second five-year plan that plunged China into famine, engineered the Cultural Revolution in 1966. Instigating young people against ‘the Four Olds’ (old ideas, old culture, old customs, and old habits), he unleashed a reign of terror, persecuting millions, only to prove his relevance. History abounds with such examples.

To sum up, Gen-Z is a promising population with modern technological advantages enabling them to play a pivotal role in the growth story of a nation. But lack of vision, impatience, and a tendency to willingly believe half-baked theories make Gen-Z vulnerable to manipulative tactics by vested interests. Gen-Z’s energy and capacities need to be channelised in a positive direction towards nation-building. Importantly, the spiritual inclination necessary for a well-rounded persona, which earlier generations had, is conspicuous by its absence in Gen-Z, as it is bogged down with material priorities. The education system needs to sensitise young people by imparting spiritual values through the curriculum at different levels. ‘End’ cannot justify the ‘Means.’ Issues can only be resolved through constitutional means and the democratic process. However, engaging with Gen-Z by addressing issues of trust deficit is necessary for all dispensations today. Ensuring inclusivity, transparency, and accountability of public offices will help the process.

Views expressed are personal. The writer is a former Additional Chief Secretary of Chhattisgarh