According to a recent article by Helen Coffey on a British media website, younger people, especially Gen Z and Millennials, are staying indoors. They are virtually connected via screens, rather than physically with people. As one of the expressions in Internet culture indicates, they do not “touch grass.” In effect, it means that while they get hassled about online debates and discussions, and relentlessly participate in them, they do not disconnect, spend time outside, or simply connect with nature. As Coffee puts it, the youngsters forget what is important: Not random hateful online arguments with strangers, but a link with the real world.
Global studies prove this. Coffee mentions a smaller survey by the official tourism body of British Columbia, Canada, which found that two-thirds of Gen Z do not go out for days. More than half of the millennials do the same. Across generations, while people do go out, only a fourth of the surveyed claimed that they made a conscious effort, at least once a day, to leave the closeted, yet comfortable, safety of the indoors. If they do go out more often, it is due to the pressures and efforts made by friends, colleagues and family. Even children do not venture out. Another study found that the outdoor time spent by them has slipped by 50 per cent within a generation.
Such conclusions go counter to the anchor piece on this page, which talks about the students’ protests on the streets across South and Southeast Asia. Let us remember the Arab Spring, which sprang up in the 2010s in much of the Arab world, from Tunisia to five other nations, Libya, Egypt, Yemen, Syria and Bahrain. Prior to those, there was the much-publicised Tiananmen Square in China. Before it, the Hippie culture took over Europe and America by storm. As did the young communists, who were aided and abetted by the Soviet Union. In each generation, the refrain was that the youngsters were disconnected with the real world. And then they changed the world, for better or worse, for short periods or prolonged times.
There are three issues to ponder on. First, in each generation, the young possess more information, and understand the world. Thanks to technology, which they adopt easily, they get the news and opinions. It may be the radio in one generation, TV in the next, niche newspapers and magazines, telephone, Internet and social media. They may not read the same things as the previous generation, and may be aware of specific issues. But when the crunch time comes, they know the issues that need their attention, and which are worth exploding socially and politically. Who thought the students would force the US to withdraw from Vietnam, or Indira Gandhi to impose the Emergency. Who thought there would be a real springtime in the deserts, with the fall of autocracies, and rise of democracies.
Second, although the younger generations may seem apolitical, and inward-looking (like they do not go out, or hang with limited friends, physically or virtually), they know which side of the bread is buttered. When it comes to their aspirations, monetary, material or spiritual, or when it comes to their economic future, they are bound to react, like a leopard who reaches an unfathomable speed from a static position within seconds. For when the youngsters rise, and it takes time, there is no stopping them. Their momentum can move mountains, and remove embedded and established regimes. In a jiffy, the first-time Indian voters ejected the Congress from power after a near-continuous seven decades in power at the Centre. The same happened recently in Nepal and Bangladesh.
Finally, the Gen Z generation is more liberal, more progressive, and more radical. It is a contradictory and combustive mix, which shows up in bizarre ways. For example, a large proportion of the young people helped the US President Donald Trump to win the elections for the second time. This seems out of place, as the politician is conservative, non-liberal, and wants to take the country back. The reasons are revealed in a recent NBC poll in the US. It found that both Gen Z men and women “ranked the same three things as the most important to them in defining success: Having a fulfilling job, having money to do the things they want to do, and achieving financial independence.” Now, does it make sense? Did not Trump promise these things through his mega MAGA slogan?