Why young people’s anger is justified – and why trust in politics is waning. A guest commentary

Dieser Artikel ist auch in deutscher Sprache verfügbar: Zum deutschen Artikel.

On 31 October, young people in numerous cities plan to demonstrate for greater investment in education, health and social services. The anger felt by many young people is not simply an expression of impatience or a lack of life experience: it stems from the impression that political decisions are increasingly jeopardising their future, whilst those who made these decisions – or failed to implement necessary reforms – are rarely held personally accountable for the long-term consequences.

Young people are expected to make provision for their pensions, even though housing is expensive and many are barely able to build up any savings despite being in work. They are expected to tackle the climate crisis, even though a significant proportion of emissions were generated in decades when they themselves had no political influence. They are expected to renew a dilapidated infrastructure, finance social security systems and adapt to an uncertain world of work.

At the same time, they see necessary changes being postponed, political promises being watered down and responsibility being passed back and forth between governments, parties and institutions.

These experiences combine to create a fundamental sense of injustice: the older political generation was able to decide on key conditions for the future, whilst the younger generation is left to bear a significant proportion of the costs.

Trust squandered

Trust erodes particularly when, on the one hand, politicians call for austerity and personal responsibility, whilst on the other hand, tax scandals involving billions, inadequately monitored privileges and long-standing failures in public investment come to light.

Tax evasion, legal tax breaks and corruption are not one and the same. Yet, taken together, they raise the question of whether state regulations are enforced with the same rigour across all social groups.

Those who demand strict compliance with social security obligations must also explain why major tax losses are sometimes so difficult to recover. Those who call on young people to make sacrifices must provide a clear justification for why necessary investments in education, infrastructure and climate protection are repeatedly delayed.

This creates a cycle of disappointment, anger and mistrust: Political failures exacerbate fears about the future; a failure to face the consequences undermines the credibility of those in charge; and when even protest appears to bring about insufficient change, doubts grow as to whether democratic participation can actually make a difference.

Politics without responsibility

This anger is therefore not necessarily directed at older people as such. It is directed at a political system in which the short-term preservation of power often takes precedence over long-term responsibility, and in which the interests of future generations are given too little weight compared to well-organised present-day interests.

Of course, older people, too, have experienced social insecurity, fought for democracy and climate protection, and made important contributions to prosperity. However, this does not absolve political decision-makers of responsibility for poor decisions. Nor should young people be denied the right to criticise on the grounds that, after all, previous generations also worked hard.

The moral right to be angry arises where people are forced to bear the consequences of political decisions without having had an adequate say in them, whilst at the same time witnessing those responsible failing to be held sufficiently to account.

Young people need not wait for established political actors to voluntarily change their priorities. They are entitled to challenge political parties, organise their own majorities, take up political office and democratically reshape existing power structures – even in the face of resistance from older voting blocs.

This is not a rejection of democracy, but a demand for its effective use. For democratic trust is not built by people suppressing their criticism, but by their criticism being heard and leading to tangible changes.

The crucial danger, therefore, is not that young people are angry. It is that their anger remains permanently unaddressed, and that justified mistrust turns into the conviction that the political system is fundamentally incapable of protecting their future.

The younger generation is not demanding special privileges. It is demanding that responsibility and political power go hand in hand – and that its future no longer depends on decisions whose costs others have to bear.

***

The protest in Leipzig will take place on Saturday, 31 October, from 2.00 pm on Augustusplatz.