From Serbia to Bangladesh and Senegal, young people are becoming a driving force for a more democratic world. Yet too often labelled as “youth”, young people are taken into account only on youth issues or in limited spaces like youth councils or summits. In search of alternative routes, they are developing new forms of civic engagement – through artistic protest, online campaigns and storytelling – and rewriting the rules of political participation. Instead of addressing youth as a youth issue, analysts should learn from youth activism as a way to rethink how democracy works.
Youth activism has always been a driving force for social change. From civil rights movements to environmental protests, young people represent the innovative power of change towards a more democratic and inclusive world. Over the past decades, the structure of civil society has been redefined in response to growing threats to human rights and freedoms. The digital age has also given people new tools to communicate, coordinate, and organise. The youth have been at the forefront of these innovations, reshaping and expanding the exercise of the freedoms of association and peaceful assembly.
Today, young people are not only innovating within civil society; they are also actively rewriting the rules of political participation. The findings of the first Global Youth Participation Index reaffirm that young people are systematically excluded from traditional decision-making spaces. This often leads to disillusionment with institutions that label them without genuinely including them. Nevertheless, evidence shows that many young people are forging innovative pathways to democratic participation. These new forms of mobilisation are not just youthful expressions of dissent; they are transformative practices that challenge existing models of civic engagement. However, the efforts of the youth are often misunderstood or dismissed as temporary or transitional, rather than recognised as central to democracy’s future.
Rather than retreating from politics, young people are reimagining how democracy can function from the ground up. Although youth action and participation are not the only ways to strengthen democratic resilience, it is important to recognise their value. Overlooking the fair and equal inclusion of young people in decision-making processes is a missed opportunity. For those working to support democracy, doing so means missing the chance to make democratic systems more inclusive, resilient, and responsive to future challenges.
Interested but not included
Young people across all regions consistently express an interest in political activism, yet simultaneously mistrust traditional institutions. In Latin America, for example, data from the Americas Barometer indicates a correlation between youth protests and low levels of institutional trust. In the Middle East and North Africa, the Arab Barometer and youth reviews by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development indicate that while young people favour pluralist democracy, they perceive themselves as excluded from meaningful political roles.
Similarly, comparative studies by the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung in Central Asia confirm that many young people avoid traditional governance channels, instead engaging in civic activities outside institutional frameworks, usually by turning to digital platforms and tools.
A Flash Eurobarometer survey in 2024 revealed that 64% of young Europeans intended to vote in the upcoming European Parliament elections, with many having participated in organised activities in the past year. However, 32% of young respondents believed that social media were a more effective political tool than voting.
This is also confirmed by the Global Youth Participation Index which highlights the global trends. The political affairs dimension of the index performed the worst, with a score of 51 out of 100. This reflects structural barriers such as age restrictions for holding office, weak youth representation in legislatures and limited roles in political parties. In contrast, the civic space dimension, which includes freedom of peaceful assembly as one of the 11 variables, scores higher at 62. This indicates that young people create greater opportunities for activism and participation outside formal institutions, often through online platforms or community initiatives. Elections fare only slightly better, with a score of 54, which points to persistent obstacles such as complicated registration processes and limited voter education. Socio-economic participation ranks strongest at 77, largely driven by access to education and employment opportunities. However, disparities remain stark between regions.
These figures highlight a consistent trend: young people are not disengaged – they are redefining participation.
More democratic political engagement
When young people take to the streets or speak out online, they are often met with a mixture of admiration and condescension. The rhetoric about the youth is that they are “the future”; yet in many political and institutional contexts, young people are rarely meaningfully involved in decision-making processes without being labelled as “youth”. They are encouraged to participate and mobilise, but they are usually taken into account and listened to only when it comes to so-called youth issues or in pre-determined spaces that rarely allow for equal influence, such as youth councils, forums, and summits.
In this light, youth participation is too often perceived as inspirational rather than politically critical or disruptive. As a result, the democracy support community is losing an opportunity to innovate and strengthen, while almost forcing young people to explore new ways of defining their democratic identity by filling the gaps in the formal structures of political participation.
This disconnect between performative inclusion and real influence pushes the youth to create alternative spaces of political expression. Building on their need to have their voices heard, the youth are developing new and often unconventional forms of engagement that are redefining democratic participation not only for them but also for the broader civic space. Mutual aid groups, online campaigns, climate strikes, digital storytelling, and artistic protest are becoming increasingly important types of civic action. The democracy support community underestimates the political capacity of young people and therefore misses crucial opportunities for innovation and resilience.
A striking European example comes from Serbia, where in early 2025 students sparked one of the most significant youth-led movements in Europe since 1968. What started as a local protest evolved into a wider national demand for democracy, which spread internationally. The movement attracted teachers, lawyers, and older citizens, who formed cross-generational alliances rarely seen in the region.
Despite the Serbian government’s attempts to discredit the protests by blaming them on foreign interference and putting pressure on civil society, the movement remained peaceful and resilient, characterised by horizontal leadership and a refusal to affiliate with political parties. Rather than appeal to youth issues, the movement succeeded by exposing systemic failures that resonated across society. The youth were not only speaking for themselves; they also became a catalyst for broader democratic demands.
Outside Europe, the Cuba Decide (“Cuba Decides”) movement is a clear example of an engaging and resilient youth-led initiative. Cuba Decide has peacefully mobilised citizens in Cuba and the diaspora to campaign for democratic reform, mainly by using digital platforms, in a context where digital repression by the government is a predominant issue for civil society.
Despite operating under a repressive regime, the initiative has used international networks and encrypted communication tools to raise awareness, call for referendums, and put pressure on institutions abroad to support Cuban civic freedom. One of the movement’s milestones came in 2021, when massive protests in the country brought together civil society fighting for political, civil, economic, and social issues through an intersectional approach.
In July 2024, Bangladesh witnessed an unprecedented mass mobilisation, which was driven by the youth of generation Z and led to the ouster of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina in August of the same year. What started as a student protest against a quota system for public-sector jobs evolved into a nationwide mobilisation, showing the power of youth-led, intersectional action. Although the participants adopted a non-violent approach, the movement was met with severe repression, resulting in over 1,400 deaths.
Since then, young people in Bangladesh have been organising to propose a democratic alternative in formal politics. In February 2025, they launched the National Citizens’ Party, the first party born directly from the 2024 gen Z revolution. At the party’s launch, its leaders declared their vision of creating a “Second Republic” – a renewed Bangladesh built on democratic foundations. They set out ambitious plans, including the establishment of a wholly new political framework and the drafting of a new constitution, emphasising that the country has not achieved true freedom or democracy since gaining independence in 1971.
In Senegal in 2023–24, young activists rallied in major protests against President Macky Sall’s attempt to delay elections and repress the opposition. Members of the group Y’en a Marre (“Fed Up”) allied with civil society groups that played a central role in mobilising citizens and defending the constitutional order. The movement built on the work of youth mobilisation in 2011, when young rappers and journalists had opposed the president’s attempt to gain an unconstitutional third term.
Youth engagement was fundamental in Senegal’s March 2024 presidential election, which saw the rise to power of Bassirou Diomaye Faye. Widely seen as a generational shift, his victory was driven by youth voter turnout and grassroots networks inspired by Y’en a Marre’s 2011 blueprint.
These initiatives show not only creative activism and innovative use of spaces and tools but also a response to exclusion and a desire to be part of shaping democratic futures. More and more young people are mobilising not because they are empowered by the system, but because they are excluded from it. Their participation reflects a need to be heard and included. Building on the assumption that every issue is a youth issue, young people are challenging the idea that political participation can occur only in sanctioned venues, highlighting that democratic renewal often begins outside traditional spaces of power.
Informality as innovation
The shrinking of civic space and the global increase in repression have led to greater innovation among young people. Youth-led movements increasingly operate outside formal structures, often in an informal or semi-formal manner. This trend is a defining feature of the new phase of civic movements, which are flexible, intersectional, and digitally fluent.
This informality is a strength when it enables young activists to bypass bureaucratic and ideological gatekeeping. In Thailand and Belarus, for example, encrypted apps have enabled rapid mobilisation. In Brazil, street art and TikTok challenge exploitative narratives. In Kazakhstan, informal groups such as Oyan, Qazaqstan! confront state narratives through creative resistance and open-source tools.
These examples reflect the concept of what American philosopher Nancy Fraser has called “subaltern counterpublics”: parallel discursive spaces in which marginalised groups develop alternative conceptions of democratic participation. Youth-led groups also practise the values and structures they intend to establish, such as horizontal leadership, mutual aid, intersectionality, and inclusive participation. Rather than wait for democracy to embrace them, these groups include democratic ideals from the margins.
The risk of exclusion
Not all youth activism is associated with pro-democracy movements or initiatives. Disinformation, manipulation of political discourse, and authoritarian narratives do not always lead to a pro-democracy response from young people: they can also foster the creation of nationalist, xenophobic, or even violent political projects – in both democratic countries and authoritarian regimes. Autocracies increasingly mimic the mobilisation tactics of their counterparts, for instance by using online platforms to share messages and spread disinformation, underlining the potential of the techniques used mostly by grassroots movements.
In India, the youth wings of some political parties have been instrumental in spreading hate speech and polarisation, through both their street presence and their digital campaigns. In Brazil, online networks of young influencers, often sponsored by the fossil-fuel industry, have played a role in normalising disinformation and climate change denial.
In parts of Europe, far-right youth groups have emerged around themes of national identity, anti-immigration, and traditionalism, often with strong digital strategies similar to those of grassroots pro-democracy movements. Even in conflict zones, young people are not only peacemakers: some are active agents of violence or are mobilised around nationalist rhetoric with no space for dissent or pluralism.
Young people’s ability to organise and mobilise a wide audience is driven by the same energy and urgency whether they are involved in far-right or pro-democracy movements. This ability also relies on a shared set of digital and online tools. The power of youth activism does not necessarily need to be channelled into traditional structures, but democratic institutions should embrace this innovative power and recognise that what the youth are asking for is a seat at the decision-making table, and not just as representatives of young people. To strengthen democracy, societies need to build real pathways of participation and foster critical thinking while creating the conditions for young people to lead transformative civic initiatives.
Acting now on the gaps in which the youth and broader civil society are building their initiatives is important not only as a short-term response to democratic backsliding but also to integrate new forms of civic engagement that can make communities more resilient and responsive. If democracies miss this opportunity, this power risks being co-opted by authoritarian and autocratic regimes, which will reinforce their anti-democratic messages.
Reframing the youth label
There is a need for a shift in the way democracy support approaches the youth. The conversation about youth participation needs to change and be integrated into the broader discourse on political participation, civic engagement, and social mobilisation.
The most effective and innovative forms of civic action today are led by those – not just young people – who have been systematically marginalised and perceived as such by the public discourse around them. Today, what makes youth activism visible and valuable is not the novelty of the age group itself but the adaptive, inclusive, and experimental forms of democratic engagement that the youth are modelling, often in response to systemic failure.
Specific programmes for youth engagement are useful to create ad hoc spaces for young people to develop critical thinking skills and raise awareness, but such programmes should not replace equal and inclusive political participation, and young voices should not be heard only in these spaces. If young people only address youth issues and are labelled as youth, civil society as a whole will lose the opportunity for a more inclusive and resilient democracy.
Therefore, instead of asking what makes youth activism unique and how young people can make a difference, analysts should ask what lessons structured systems of civic participation can learn from the way young people mobilise. Youth activism is, fundamentally, political participation: a vital part of the way democracy evolves and sustains itself. The public sphere needs to see youth-led movements as potentially sustainable models for rethinking how democracy works and could work in the future.
Encouraging this kind of political participation will help the democracy support community respond to current threats and emergencies. In the long term, it will contribute to creating a more democratic space in which young people can continue to innovate as part of their natural approach. At the same time, such engagement can help accelerate innovation throughout the political system – allowing new tools, methods, ideas, and techniques to be part of the process from the start.
Author
Carlotta Magoga is a Research and Programmes Officer at the European Partnership for Democracy (EPD). She is responsible for the WYDE Freedoms project, which includes both research and advocacy activities to promote and protect freedom of association and peaceful assembly, with a focus on the youth sector. Before joining EPD, she worked at ALDA, in the project development department, supporting the drafting of project proposals. As a young activist, she has always been involved in volunteer work for various associations both in Italy and in Brussels. She co-founded Impatto APS, a non-profit association that aims to raise awareness about sustainability and promote sustainable habits; in her role, she develops projects and implements podcasts. She holds a Master’s degree in Human Rights, Migration and International Cooperation from the University of Bergamo.
This article was published as part of the WYDE Freedoms project, aimed at supporting young civil society actors across the globe in upholding and promoting the freedoms of assembly and association.
The project is part of the European Commission’s broader WYDE (Women and Youth Democratic Engagement) initiative which seeks to strengthen the rights and participation of youth and women in public and political life.
