Beyond Political Change: A Marxist Analysis of Gen Z Protests
We are living in a time of major protests and political movements, especially among Gen Z. Young people around the world are challenging corruption, authoritarian governments, inequality, and economic exclusion. Many of these movements can remove unpopular leaders or governments. But there is a deeper question: Do they actually change the system, or do they simply change the people running it?
From a Marxist point of view, this is an important difference. A government can change while the economic system remains the same. If the basic structures that create inequality and exploitation remain untouched, the problems may return under new leaders.
The Basic Logic of Capitalism
Karl Marx argued that society is deeply shaped by economic relationships and class differences. He believed that history is largely driven by conflicts between different social classes.
One of his central arguments was that workers create more economic value than they receive in wages. The difference becomes profit for the owners of businesses and capital.
This idea is still relevant today. In the gig economy, for example, workers may appear to have more freedom because they work through apps and digital platforms. But they are often controlled by algorithms, ratings, data collection, and changing payment systems.
Technology has changed the way people work, but the basic question remains: Who creates the value, and who receives most of it?
Marx described capital as something that survives by feeding on human labour. In today's world, this can be seen in different forms of insecure work, low wages, long working hours, and constant pressure to remain productive.
Legal Equality Does Not Always Mean Real Equality
Modern democracies generally promise equality before the law. In principle, everyone has the same rights. But legal equality does not automatically create economic equality.
A wealthy person and a poor worker may have the same legal rights, but they do not have the same economic power, access to resources, or influence.
Charities, NGOs, and social programmes can help people and reduce suffering. Their work can be valuable. However, from a Marxist perspective, they cannot completely solve inequality if the economic structures producing that inequality remain unchanged.
This is why simply replacing one government with another may not be enough. If the economic system stays the same, new leaders may end up operating the same old machinery.
How the System Absorbs Protest
The Frankfurt School, particularly Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer, developed the idea of the "culture industry." They argued that modern capitalism can turn even opposition into something that can be sold and consumed.
This idea is especially relevant in the age of social media.
- A protest can become a viral video.
- A political slogan can become a T-shirt.
- A revolutionary message can become a social-media trend.
- Anger can generate millions of views, likes, shares, and advertisements.
In this way, the system can sometimes absorb criticism instead of being seriously challenged by it.
Herbert Marcuse made a similar argument in One-Dimensional Man. He suggested that modern capitalism can keep people satisfied through consumer goods and manufactured desires. People may feel that they are expressing their individuality through what they buy, watch, wear, and post, while the deeper economic structure remains unchanged.
Erich Fromm also examined how insecurity can push people toward conformity. People may believe they are completely free while their choices are strongly influenced by economic pressure, social expectations, and the demands of the market.
The Need to Look Beyond Political Change
Walter Benjamin warned against the simple belief that history always moves toward progress. Technological and economic development can create enormous wealth while also producing new forms of suffering.
That contradiction is visible today. We have extraordinary technology, communication, and wealth, yet millions of people continue to face insecure employment, rising living costs, inequality, and political frustration.
This is why Marx remains relevant. His importance is not necessarily that he provided a perfect political solution. Rather, he gave us a way to ask deeper questions about power, ownership, labour, wealth, and class.
Gen Z uprisings can challenge governments, expose corruption, and demand accountability. These are important achievements. But political change alone may not be enough.
The bigger question is not simply "Who is in power?" It is also:
"Who owns the wealth, who controls the economy, who creates the value, and who benefits from it?"
Unless those deeper questions are addressed, changing political leaders may only mean putting new faces in charge of an old system.