As Gen Z movements shake the foundations of traditional politics from Indonesia, Nepal to Europe, the old pillars of representative democracy are no longer enough to hold up the world. We must move beyond the ballot box toward a deliberative, bottom-up model that gives the new generation a real seat at the table.
WHAT will it take to fulfil the aspirations of today's youth?
This is the central question that top political leaders and policymakers worldwide must ask themselves. In 2025, there were several protests led by young people, what newspapers and pundits have generally referred to as "Gen Z movements." These events occurred across the globe in places that are, on the surface, very different from one another.
Nepal, Indonesia and Madagascar were the hotspots of these events, capturing our collective attention for months. However, we are witnessing a much more widespread phenomenon that reflects a general malaise among the new generations regarding how politics is conducted.
Many democratic societies have been under tremendous stress, a reality that transcends national GDP ratios. While last year’s major youth movements happened in emerging nations, it does not mean established democracies in industrialised nations are safe. After all, the rise of populism, especially the far right in Europe and the United States, is a reflection of discontent that cuts across regions and income levels.
What is the recipe to address these grievances? Job creation must be a priority. The issue of unemployment and precarious, low-paid work is a common thread linking Kathmandu to the major cities of Europe. Now, consider the rise of unregulated and potentially dangerous technologies like Artificial Intelligence. How much worse will the status of employment be by 2030?
Only now have governments started putting "brakes" on social media use among minors, but it is a case of too little, too late. AI’s development could truly spiral out of control. I am not even referring to sci-fi scenarios of automated robots in armies; I am focusing on the immediate impact of AI on jobs, and the outlook is frightening.
Furthermore, effectively implementing the Paris Agreement and the Kunming-Montreal Biodiversity Framework is essential. If you analyse the disappointing COP 30 climate summit in Brazil last November, you will realise that the governance of the Paris Agreement has become almost unmanageable – too complex, too slow and subject to a continuous loop of national political posturing. Ultimately, these massive issues can only be solved if we address the root problem: the weakening of the existing democratic model.
Liberal democracy is based on election and representation. These two pillars were effective for the last six decades, but they are no longer delivering. They supported the industrialisation of the West, but they are now insufficient for a digital, globalised world.
To answer the question posed at the beginning of this column, we must resolve two related conundrums: How can democracy do a better job? How can young people feel like they are part of the institutions underpinning the system?
The solution lies in institutionalising forms of deliberative democracy, where citizens play a much larger role than in the current model. Deliberation is the keyword behind a new frontier of democracy emerging in both the Global North and South.
Yet, this model has not yet become mainstream, nor is it fully understood for the value it can deliver.
Without an urgent reform of how politics works in democratic nations, we will remain disillusioned and trapped in a loop of protests unable to herald better political horizons. Such protests may generate temporary hope, but they often end in frustration because "politics as usual" cannot meet the challenges of our times.
This problem is further compounded by the risk of bloodshed when governments use a repressive hand to rein in youth-led movements. A revamped, bottom-up democratic system provides the resilience societies need to cope with the troubles ahead, including the turbocharging of geopolitical rivalries.
In Nepal, recent elections acted as a political earthquake, sweeping away traditional parties. This has set the stage for a new government that could finally meet the needs of the generation behind last September's protests.
There is a promising idea in the Himalayan nation: the establishment of a Gen Z Council. I personally hope this evolves into a Gen Z Assembly that utilises deliberative practices. But even a fully deliberative assembly, while a milestone, would not be enough.
We need an ambitious, sustainable vision that moves fast enough to deal with the issues affecting our society. Several workshops I attended recently demonstrated that deliberative systems could deliver.
Democracy Next, one of the most active organisations in the field, found in its study that a new model based on deliberation where citizens are involved and active in the decision making is not just an illusion. It is instead something that can work everywhere, including in developing nations.
There is still a prevailing misconception about these nations, the fact that folks living there should be more concerned about providing for themselves and meeting their needs rather than being engaged in bottom-up democratic discussions.
Evidence shows the perception is wrong, although a lot more still need to be done to institutionalise deliberative democracy.
Just recently, we lost one of the fathers of deliberative democracy, Jürgen Habermas. He was more than just a philosopher; he introduced the concept of "public spheres" as spaces for citizens to build political agency and enrich societies with social capital. This is the best antidote to societal collapse.
Can the quest for youth empowerment lead away from the streets and toward a revolution in how democracy functions? If we embrace new forms of political engagement, the new generation can move forward with confidence, despite the thunderstorms on the horizon. — The Jakarta Post/ANN
Simone Galimberti is a freelance writer focusing on human rights and development.
