top of page

By:

Anil D. Salve

21 March 2026 at 2:41:09 pm

Why Generation Z Refuses TO Be Silenced

We often complain that today's youth are difficult to understand. Perhaps the real problem, however, is not Generation Z-it is our inability to communicate with them. Instead of learning how they think, speak, and engage with the world, we often expect them to fit into frameworks created by previous generations. Generation Z is among the most informed, courageous, and globally connected generations in history. Born into the age of the internet and social media, they have grown up with...

Why Generation Z Refuses TO Be Silenced

We often complain that today's youth are difficult to understand. Perhaps the real problem, however, is not Generation Z-it is our inability to communicate with them. Instead of learning how they think, speak, and engage with the world, we often expect them to fit into frameworks created by previous generations. Generation Z is among the most informed, courageous, and globally connected generations in history. Born into the age of the internet and social media, they have grown up with instant access to information and diverse perspectives. They are aware not only of events in India but also of developments across the world-from Iran and the United States to Nigeria, Europe, and beyond. This global exposure has shaped a generation that is confident, informed, and willing to express its opinions. Yet they are frequently judged by outdated standards. Rather than trying to understand their aspirations, their language, and their methods of communication, many continue to measure them by the expectations of an earlier era. This is where the disconnect begins. Generation Z has developed a new language of civic and political expression-one that traditional institutions have often struggled to understand. To engage meaningfully with this generation, we must first learn this new language instead of dismissing it. Recent events have demonstrated how a seemingly simple demand can evolve into a broader movement centred on justice, accountability, freedom, and democratic values. When young people feel unheard or misunderstood, their concerns naturally expand into deeper questions about governance and the systems that shape their lives. This is no longer a phenomenon confined to one city or one state. Across Maharashtra and throughout India, young people are actively participating in conversations about democracy, public policy, and social change. Many who once remained indifferent to politics now believe that governance directly affects their education, employment, rights, and future. One of the greatest mistakes society can make is to underestimate this generation. They are digitally connected, socially aware, and capable of mobilising support within hours. Their movements are often driven not by political parties but by shared experiences, collective concerns, and a strong sense of justice. Unlike previous generations, Generation Z communicates through humour, satire, memes, and social media. These are not merely forms of entertainment; they have become powerful tools for political expression, civic engagement, and questioning authority. History has repeatedly shown that confident leadership welcomes criticism, while insecurity often responds with fear. Perhaps the most striking characteristic of this generation is its refusal to be governed by fear. Earlier generations often remained silent because they feared losing their jobs, facing social consequences, or inviting trouble. Increasingly, Generation Z believes that silence is no longer an acceptable response to injustice. This generation has found its voice, forged its identity, and developed the confidence to participate in public life. It understands that individual well-being cannot be separated from the well-being of society. If injustice is ignored today because it affects someone else, it may eventually affect everyone. India has witnessed numerous social movements throughout its history. What distinguishes many contemporary youth movements is that they are largely youth-led, digitally organised, and focused not only on immediate grievances but also on broader structural reforms rooted in fairness, transparency, accountability, and equal opportunity. Digital platforms have played a transformative role in this process. For Generation Z, social media is far more than a communication tool-it is a platform for building communities, organising campaigns, sharing information, and amplifying voices. Young people no longer feel isolated because they know that thousands of others stand with them, regardless of geographical distance. Equally inspiring is the compassion demonstrated by many young participants in public movements. Reports of volunteers organising food, supporting fellow participants, and even extending assistance to police personnel highlight that these movements are driven not only by resistance but also by empathy, solidarity, and a sense of shared responsibility. Their methods may be modern, but their values remain timeless. The future of India increasingly rests in the hands of a generation that is globally connected, socially conscious, technologically empowered, and unafraid to question injustice. Whether one agrees with every demand they raise or not, one reality is impossible to ignore: Generation Z has found its voice. Instead of attempting to silence, stereotype, or dismiss them, society must choose to listen, engage, and learn. Every generation reshapes the future in its own way. This generation has chosen courage over fear, participation over silence, and hope over indifference. (The writer is the Principal of Podar International School, Ausa, Latur. Views personal.)

Supreme Court To Hear Tuesday Plea Concerning 1991 Places Of Worship Act

  • PTI
  • Mar 31, 2025
  • 2 min read


New Delhi: The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear on Tuesday a plea challenging the validity of a provision of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, which mandates maintaining the religious character of a place as it existed on August 15, 1947.

As per the cause list of April 1, the plea is slated to come up for hearing before a bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar.

The law prohibits conversion of any place of worship and provides for the maintenance of the religious character of any place of worship as it existed on August 15, 1947.

However, the dispute relating to the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid at Ayodhya was kept out of its purview.

The plea has sought the apex court’s direction, allowing courts to pass appropriate orders to ascertain the original religious character of a place of worship.

It has challenged section 4(2) of the Act that barred proceedings to change the religious character, besides prohibiting filing of fresh cases for the same.

“The Centre has transgressed its legislative power in barring the judicial remedy, which is a basic feature of the Constitution. It is well established that the right to judicial remedy by filing suit in a competent court, cannot be barred and the power of courts cannot be abridged and such denial has been held to be violative of basic feature of the Constitution, beyond legislative power,” the plea filed by petitioner Nitin Upadhyay, a law student, said.

The plea, filed through advocate Shweta Sinha, said the Act mandated preservation and maintenance of the religious character of places of worship without barring changes in the “structure, edifice, construction or building” in these places.

It said, “Structural change is permissible to restore the original religious character of the place.” The Act did not prohibit any scientific or documentary survey to ascertain the religious character of the place, the plea said.

In February, the apex court had expressed displeasure over filing of several pleas on the 1991 Act and said a three-judge bench would in April hear the pending post-notice petitions related to the law.

The top court, however, had granted liberty to some petitioners to file applications for intervention in the pending ones by citing new legal grounds The top court, through its December 12, 2024 order, effectively stalled proceedings in about 18 lawsuits filed by various Hindu parties seeking survey to ascertain original religious character of 10 mosques, including Gyanvapi at Varanasi, Shahi Idgah Masjid at Mathura and Shahi Jama Masjid at Sambhal where four people died in clashes.

Comments

bottom of page