What was the Gen-Z movement really about? Are we moving toward fulfilling its essence? The movement raised deep questions about trust — in the state, in industry and commerce, in the bureaucracy, and in the capacity of leadership itself. How do we respond to this? Though led by the younger generation, the Gen-G movement expressed the frustrations and aspirations of all Nepalis.
It captured the collective spirit of the people, compelling us to ask: how can we address the problems it identified, repair the damage it caused, and realize the hopes it inspired? The responsibility to respond is immense.
Elections alone will not meet the essence of this movement; perhaps that was never the intent. The movement called for more — for coordination, reform, and credibility. Without that, the same questions will arise again, even challenging the legitimacy of elections themselves.
We are now standing at a crossroads of uncertainty. The state must be decisive — clear about its direction, strategies, and goals. Yet that clarity is missing. The Gen-Z movement was a massive eruption — peaceful at first, but it ended in turbulence, leaving behind irreparable losses. No one has claimed responsibility for the damage, yet it must be addressed urgently. Hope must not die again.
Business confidence has collapsed. If entrepreneurs believe the country is no longer safe for investment, it signals a deeper national crisis. The government should have acted swiftly with policy responses — to restore confidence in the economy, security forces, and bureaucracy. If citizens believe their properties could again be burned or looted, no one will feel secure in this country. The state must immediately announce a practical, experience-based assurance package — not just words, but concrete actions.
Winning or losing cannot define this process — only collective progress can. Ego-driven competition will only deepen divisions. It is time to set aside pride and communicate with harmony, friendship, empathy, cooperation, and coordination.
Elections may come within six months, but lost trust cannot be rebuilt that quickly. This is long-term damage caused by short-term politics. Addressing this damage requires genuine commitment to good governance and anti-corruption reform — the two main demands of the Gen-Z generation.
Corruption thrives where systems are weak and moral foundations erode. We have focused on education for employment but ignored education for character. Many honest individuals never get opportunities — that is a national failure.
Good governance is not a commodity that can be handed out; it is the outcome of integrity, accountability, and institutional strength. For that, the state must introspect: has it acted like a state? Has it fulfilled its duty to guarantee justice and governance? The Gen-Z generation has forced the state to confront its responsibilities.
While confusion remains, there is also energy and urgency. Constitutional reform, governance reform, and moral renewal — these cannot be achieved by one person or one speech. They demand collective commitment, sincere dialogue, and the courage to change together.
Even those who have spent their lives talking about the constitution may not know how to change it. Finding answers to such questions will take time — some may never be able to answer them at all. Yet one question remains clear: which path should the nation take next? Our security agencies, bureaucracy, economy, and politics all face deep-rooted problems.
We are skilled at identifying issues but not at solving them. And these challenges cannot be solved by any one group alone. The essence of the Gen-G movement lies in urging us to face these problems collectively. If we fail to respond, the risks remain unchanged; if we do, our readiness and sincerity will be tested.
The Gen-Z youth will challenge both government agencies and the business community — but neither will gain anything by retaliating. Instead, all sides must engage in continuous, constructive, and cooperative dialogue, not vindictive or defensive exchanges. We must seek common ground and build solutions based on mutual respect and understanding.
The business community, too, must embrace its responsibility and work toward healing and restoration. Only through cooperation and empathy can we rebuild confidence, stability, and hope for the future.
Winning or losing cannot define this process — only collective progress can. Ego-driven competition will only deepen divisions. It is time to set aside pride and communicate with harmony, friendship, empathy, cooperation, and coordination.
Dialogue must not stop at one round — it must continue with creative and positive thinking. Political leaders, too, must stop flaunting what they “know.” What matters is not knowledge in theory but the ability to solve real problems. The state has grown complacent, losing sight of its purpose. When the state forgets its foundational role, the very existence of the nation comes into question. We must restore that foundation with wisdom and unity.
The private sector, which contributes nearly 86 percent to the economy and employment, cannot be left in crisis. When industries close, it is not just a financial loss — it impacts countless lives. This is not a time for anyone to claim victory or defeat. Disputes should be resolved through mediation and reconciliation, not confrontation. The state must communicate until understanding is reached — not resort to force before exhausting dialogue.
Gen-Z should not be treated as a threat but as an awakening — like younger siblings urging the family to change. The new generation is asking to be heard, not silenced. Just as fathers and sons eventually become friends, the state and the youth must build that relationship of trust and respect. The business community, too, must embrace its responsibility and work toward healing and restoration. Only through cooperation and empathy can we rebuild confidence, stability, and hope for the future.
Comment