Diamanium Thinkers

Menu
Support Us

The Quiet Revolution: It’s Not Over Yet

By /

Key points

  1. Youth disillusionment with institutions is real but not final; frustration reflects political awareness and a desire for reform, not apathy.
  2. Digital activism and online engagement have transformed, rather than destroyed, civic participation, with Gen Z leading issue-based movements globally and locally.
  3. Institutional credibility has eroded due to hypocrisy and poor governance, yet reforms in education, entrepreneurship, and youth policy show signs of adaptation.
  4. Generational collaboration, not conflict, is key—intergenerational mentorship and shared innovation produce more resilient and sustainable outcomes.
  5. Restoring trust requires accountability, transparency, and inclusion, as genuine patriotism grows from justice and equal opportunity, not rhetoric.
  6. The social contract isn’t broken—it’s evolving; youth are redefining engagement through pragmatism, service, and digital empowerment rather than rejection.

Introduction

Zorain Nizamani’s “It is Over” captures the growing frustration of the young generation toward a seemingly unresponsive and outdated political and institutional order. His argument resonates with many: there is a disconnect between the youth’s aspirations and the establishment’s inertia. However, the claim that the generational contract is broken beyond repair may be premature. It’s not over yet. Beneath the noise of cynicism and disillusionment lies an undercurrent of transformation, collaboration, and constructive activism redefining civic engagement in the 21st century.

Analysis

Youth discontent is real but not terminal in nature. It is undeniable that Generation Z and younger millennials express disillusionment with traditional authority structures. According to the Edelman Trust Barometer 2024, trust in government among youth worldwide fell to just 36%, a steep decline compared to earlier decades. However, this discontent does not signify withdrawal—it signals demand for change. A Pew Research Center study (2023) found that over 70% of Gen Z respondents in democracies still believe that “active citizen engagement” is essential for progress, even when institutions disappoint them. This shows that disillusionment is not apathy—it’s a form of political consciousness evolving through new mediums.

In Pakistan, too, young people constitute nearly 64% of the population (UNDP, 2023). Many are skeptical of traditional politics, but they are not disengaged. Their activism has simply shifted platforms—from rallies and political party wings to digital campaigns, social entrepreneurship, and volunteer networks. Initiatives like ‘SheMeansBusiness’ by Facebook Pakistan, UNDP’s Youth Empowerment Programme, and Kamayi.pk’s employment platforms show youth leveraging digital tools for civic and economic transformation. This isn’t the end of youth engagement; it’s a redefinition of it.

Nizamani laments that young people are “lost in their Spotify playlists,” detached from societal issues. But empirical studies suggest otherwise. Digital activism is one of the defining features of this generation. According to Oxford Internet Institute’s 2023 Digital Civic Engagement Report, Gen Z is more likely than any previous generation to participate in online petitions, advocacy campaigns, and issue-based digital communities. Whether it is the climate justice movement, education reform, or gender equality, young people are using digital tools to mobilize public opinion faster and more effectively than any traditional political mechanism ever could.

In Pakistan, examples abound. The #GirlsTakeover campaign, led by Plan International Pakistan, reached over 4 million users on social media, amplifying demands for girls’ leadership opportunities. Likewise, environmental activism led by university students in Islamabad and Karachi has created tangible policy conversations around urban pollution. The claim that young people are indifferent collapses in the face of such evidence—they are not silent; they have simply changed the medium of their voice.

Nizamani rightly points to the establishment’s repeated attempts to ‘sell patriotism’ rather than earn it through performance. Indeed, political patronage, economic inequality, and selective narratives have corroded institutional credibility. But institutions are not static; they evolve. Across Pakistan, several examples reflect adaptation rather than collapse. The Higher Education Commission’s (HEC) growing investment in youth-led innovation projects and Punjab IT Board’s Plan9 incubation program demonstrate an institutional awareness of the need to empower young innovators rather than indoctrinate them.

Moreover, the Pakistan Youth Policy (2019), though imperfect, recognizes youth as partners in governance, not passive recipients. Provinces like Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Sindh have established youth directorates and internship schemes that, while limited, represent institutional openings that previous generations did not enjoy. Critique must therefore be coupled with recognition of gradual, data-driven progress.

The binary that Nizamani draws between the “boomers” and “Gen Z” oversimplifies reality. Intergenerational collaboration is not only possible; it’s already happening. Consider the rise of social enterprises and mentorship ecosystems where experienced professionals collaborate with young innovators. In Pakistan, programs like National Incubation Centers (NICs) and The Nest I/O have thrived precisely because they unite older mentors with younger entrepreneurs. A World Bank (2022) evaluation found that startups mentored by mixed-age teams were 35% more sustainable than those run solely by younger founders. The lesson is clear: wisdom and innovation are not opposing forces.

Globally, too, countries that embrace intergenerational collaboration outperform those that succumb to polarization. Scandinavian states, for instance, have implemented “youth-inclusive policymaking” models where citizens under 30 actively co-draft legislation in committees. This approach increased youth trust in government by 17% within three years (OECD, 2021). The same spirit can, and should, be nurtured in Pakistan.

The real challenge is not the extinction of patriotism but the credibility deficit of those invoking it. Young people are not rejecting love for country, they are rejecting hypocrisy. To regain their trust, institutions must prioritize transparency, service delivery, and equitable opportunity. Patriotism flourishes when citizens feel protected, not manipulated.

Empirical evidence supports this: countries with higher scores on Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index also report higher youth civic participation. When governance works, patriotism follows naturally.

In Pakistan’s context, enhancing trust means depoliticizing education, reforming civil service recruitment, and decentralizing youth representation. The Local Government Acts, often delayed or diluted, should be empowered to give young citizens direct roles in community decision-making. Similarly, national service programs can be redesigned to include voluntary, skills-based community work rather than ideological indoctrination.

If the establishment’s rigidity is part of the problem, so too is collective resignation. It’s not over yet because hope is still active. Youth participation in community resilience during natural disasters, such as the 2022 floods, showed immense social capital. Thousands of volunteers mobilized through NGOs and digital channels, demonstrating that despite disillusionment, civic spirit endures.

As sociologist Manuel Castells notes, “The networked generation is not detached; it is redefining engagement in decentralized, non-hierarchical forms.” The same logic applies to Pakistan’s youth. They are less ideological but more pragmatic; less partisan but more purpose-driven. That is not the death of nationalism, it’s its rebirth in a more inclusive form.

Conclusion

Generational frustration is understandable, but declaring the social contract “over” ignores the resilience of reform and renewal. The older generation must learn to listen, but the younger must also learn to build. Real change requires both confrontation and collaboration.

Yes, the establishment deserves critique. Yes, the youth are restless. But within that tension lies the promise of a better order, one defined not by slogans but by shared progress. It’s not over yet. It’s only beginning anew.

 

References

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top