The most discontented generation

In recent years, young people have taken an active part in protests across Asia and Europe, and in some cases have helped trigger political change. Social media made it easier for them to mobilize quickly, but the main causes of discontent are often linked to corruption, economic hardship, and dissatisfaction with governance. So is Gen Z really becoming an independent political force?

Gen Z is defined as the generation born from 1997 onward. Its members grew up in an era when the internet and digital technologies became an inseparable part of everyday life. But it is not only technology that unites young people: job opportunities, the quality of education, social inequality, and trust in the political system also hold an important place on their agenda.

For this reason, the phrase “the most discontented generation” should be seen not as a scientifically confirmed general description, but as an interpretation that emerged against the backdrop of recent protests.

The roots of discontent lie beyond the internet

Recent events show that protests arise from different causes. In Myanmar, after the 2021 military coup, young people took an active part in efforts to restore democracy and oppose military rule. Social media helped spread news about protests and coordinate civil disobedience. The military government, for its part, restricted the internet and suppressed independent sources of information.

In Sri Lanka in 2022, mass protests intensified amid an economic crisis. Shortages of fuel, food, and medicine, rising prices, and power outages sharpened public anger. Protesters demanded that President Gotabaya Rajapaksa and the government be held accountable. Rajapaksa left the country and resigned. The events showed that social media can speed up mobilization, but that mass discontent is rooted in problems that directly affect daily life.

In Bangladesh, student protests that began in June 2024 against the quota system for government jobs grew into a broader movement against the government. On August 5, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina left power. The UN Human Rights Office later examined the events of July–August 2024 and said that up to 1,400 people may have been killed during the suppression of the protests.

What these examples have in common is that the protests had clear social or political causes. Digital platforms brought people together, but the factors that drew them into the streets were not limited to online discussions.

Nepal: an internet restriction did not stop the protests

In September 2025, the Nepali government restricted access to a number of social networks and online platforms that had not met registration requirements. The decision provoked a sharp reaction among young people already unhappy about corruption, nepotism, and the privileges of political elites. The protests that began on September 8 escalated after clashes with security forces. Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli resigned, and former Chief Justice Sushila Karki became head of the interim government.

The causes of the discontent were much broader than the social media ban. Young people were angry about the privileges of political elites, corruption, and limited opportunities for their own future. Online discussions helped turn this discontent into a common demand.

The political change later showed up in the electoral process as well. In the parliamentary election on March 5, 2026, the Rastriya Swatantra Party won a major victory. On March 27, Balendra Shah, the former mayor of Kathmandu, was sworn in as prime minister. However, it would be wrong to explain this outcome by street protests alone: the protests exposed a crisis of trust in the old political system, while the election allowed a new political force to come to power.

France and India: the causes of protest are not the same

In September 2026, student protests began in France over problems in schools and the education system.

The movement expressed discontent over teacher shortages, overcrowded classrooms, the poor condition of school buildings, and inequality in educational opportunities. On October 6, the Associated Press reported that more than 266,000 people took part in protests across the country. Teachers and trade unions joined the students. On October 8, the government announced that it would send 3,000 qualified teachers to schools.

In India, protests over various issues were observed in 2026. In June, problems with NEET, the entrance exam for medical colleges, and claims of leaked questions caused student anger. The government temporarily restricted Telegram because of irregularities linked to the exam.

Other protests in early October were directed against the process of revising the voter rolls. Representatives of the “Cockroach Janta Party” movement demanded the resignation of the head of the Election Commission. On October 10, police detained the movement’s founder, Abhijit Dipke, in Delhi ahead of a planned protest. These events should be seen not as a continuation of the NEET controversy, but as separate protests with different causes and participants.

The examples of France and India show that youth movements are not aimed only at overthrowing governments or changing the state system. They may also target specific issues such as the quality of education, fair selection, the accountability of state bodies, or the transparency of the electoral process.

Social media: a cause or a tool of mobilization?

To understand Gen Z’s political activism, it is important to assess the role of the internet correctly. Digital platforms bring a problem to the attention of many, unite people around a common demand, spread videos of protests, and connect participants in different regions.

An analysis published in 2025 by the Carnegie Endowment notes that social media links personal grievances to a broader sense of injustice and helps shape shared symbols and demands. At the same time, if such movements lack a stable organization and clearly agreed goals, internal disagreements and the risk of violence become harder to manage.

The digital space can also become a tool of control for governments. A review published in the journal Science Advances shows that social media gives activists the ability to spread information, but can also be used for surveillance, censorship, and pressure. So social media cannot be called the sole cause of discontent. It often makes existing problems visible, spreads discontent quickly, and coordinates collective action. But it does not create jobs, does not eliminate corruption on its own, and does not automatically make state bodies accountable.

Does loneliness push people toward political discontent?

There is research on the link between loneliness and political activism among young people, but its results should be used with caution. A 2024 study by Suhyun Bae, which has not yet been published as a peer-reviewed journal article, analyzed data from several large surveys in the United States. It found that loneliness was negatively associated with traditional political participation such as voting, and positively associated with forms such as protests, petitions, and boycotts.

This result does not mean that loneliness will necessarily lead a person to protest. The study shows an observed association but does not fully establish its cause. Moreover, data from the United States cannot be applied directly to the behavior of young people in Nepal, Bangladesh, or other countries.

In a 2025 Gallup survey in the United States, 45 percent of men aged 18–29 who reported feeling lonely always or often, and 25 percent of such women, said that violence may be acceptable in some cases to achieve a political goal.

Social disconnection may be related to some people’s political attitudes, but the decision to join a protest is also influenced by the economic situation, a sense of injustice, personal experience, and political opportunities.

Will youth movements become a political force?

Recent events show that Gen Z is able to influence political processes. Through mass protests, young people can put pressure on governments, bring particular issues onto the agenda, support new political forces in elections, or demand answers from state bodies.

However, it is wrong to portray young people as a united global movement with a single goal and shared views. In Nepal, the main causes of discontent were corruption and the privileges of political elites; in Bangladesh, quotas in government jobs; in Sri Lanka, the economic crisis; in France, the quality of education; and in India, issues linked to exams and voter rolls. These demands differ from one another.

Social media makes it easier for young people to connect and mobilize. But whether protest turns into a political outcome also depends on the movement’s goals, its organizational capacity, its cooperation with other social groups, and the response of state institutions.

Therefore, rather than calling Gen Z “the most discontented generation,” it is more accurate to see it as a generation with new opportunities to express its demands on a mass scale. Its rise as a political force should be judged not only by the number of protests, but by how these movements affect state policy, elections, and long-term reforms.