Peru, Nepal, Indonesia, Madagascar, and Morocco: the young generations of these countries mobilized in 2025. Gathered under the common denominator of “Gen Z,” how can we present this movement and define the frameworks of its action?
The “Gen Z,” according to some researchers, identifies people born between the late 1990s and the early 2010s. The actions of this youth, which emphasizes the generational marker, are often associated with the use of social networks. Indeed, this is the very first generation born with these digital tools and who grew up in parallel with this technological development. Almost instinctively, they possess a form of agility in the use of digital technology compared to previous generations. They are also connected by common symbols: the flag of the series One Piece, the nature of their claims, their repertoire of actions, virtual or real. However, behind this generic term of “Gen Z,” national frameworks and specificities remain visible.
The mobilizations of young generations take place in national contexts and various political systems. Do they have notable common points?
In most observed cases, these are countries of the “Global South” with a long tradition of colonial and postcolonial struggles: for example, researcher Alex de Jong shows how the Nepalese movement of 2025 is in line with the hopes aroused by the 1990 uprising, which transformed the country into a multiparty constitutional monarchy. However, the contemporary dynamic cannot be understood without considering a second element: the effects of imitation between these countries, raising the question of the unity of ongoing mobilizations. Effects of mimicry had already been observed with the previous movements of the 2010s in countries such as the Maghreb, with the Arab Spring (2011-2012), Senegal and Burkina Faso, with the African Springs (2012-2014), or in Asia, in Hong Kong in 2014 and then in 2019. Other movements occurred after the Covid-19 pandemic, notably in Sri Lanka in 2022, and in Bangladesh in 2024.
If we look at the structure of all these societies, it is immediately noticeable that they are generally young states, in both historical and demographic senses. According to consulted estimates, each time at least a quarter of their population belongs to the “Gen Z.” In Morocco, in 2024, it would constitute about 30% of the population (37.9 million); in Nepal, 9 million out of 30 million inhabitants; as for Madagascar, the median age is 21.3 years (2024). It is not surprising that youth mobilizations erupt in these countries.
Furthermore, urbanization and education levels are increasing everywhere, despite significant inequalities. The second striking feature of unity is that all these societies are characterized by very strong socio-economic and political inequalities. Part of the population is seen as privileged, or even ultra-privileged, compared to a vast majority that sometimes lacks access to essential goods and services, such as healthcare in Morocco or electricity in Madagascar.
If the political systems are similar, are the demands carried from one country to another also similar?
This is a third element of unity among all these countries: accusations of misgovernance are prevalent everywhere, perceived through the lens of corruption, privileges of the elites, and a growing gap between rulers and governed. These are movements that demand similar advances and all denounce material and political inequalities.
The disconnect between elites and the people could echo the one expressed in the slogan “We are the 99%,” carried by diverse movements in the early 2010s, like the Indignados and Occupy Wall Street, as well as by Chilean student movements in favor of a new educational policy, which spread throughout South America. This polarization points to a double economic and political inequality. Researchers Albert Ogien and Sandra Laugier observed worldwide in 2014 the repetition of movements launched or invested by the youth around a single slogan: democracy. In their view, this notion encompasses a wide range of demands, from the integrity of governors to the critique of the erosion of the representative system where it exists. According to another researcher, Angelo Montoni Rios, demanding democracy allows activists to formulate a demand to which a large number of citizens could adhere, assuming the spontaneous, non-partisan, and mostly non-violent nature of these protests. This is why these causes, defined with Valérie Becquet as “democratic” in the truest sense, stem from demands for real equality among citizens facing systems that are often formally democratic but accused of favoring certain categories of the population over others, a trait accentuated by the neoliberalism defended by the ruling elites.
