Response Analysis
Giving the impression that “everything ends” with the coming or going of a specific class to power is superficial thinking and may reflect the mental confusion of certain groups. The content of the column clearly indicates the writer’s lack of familiarity with history, politics, and sociology. Advanced nations of the world are not built solely on the anger of youth or the failures of the elderly, but rather through generational continuity, institutional evolution, reforms over time, and the rule of law. If we accept the young writer’s view that the disinterest of youth is the final proof of decline, then Germany would not be among the world’s strongest economies today. In the 1960s and 1970s, German youth protested intensely against the state, the capitalist system, and the old political leadership. Universities turned into battlegrounds, and the government was called an “occupation by the old,” but the result was that youth were not kept outside the system; instead, they were integrated into it. Today, youth participation in Germany is a reality. Similarly, look at South Korea. In the 1980s, its younger generation took to the streets against military dictatorship, facing state repression, censorship, and police violence as a daily routine. If at that time it was said that “everything is over,” South Korea would not have become a global hub for technology, freelancing, and the digital economy today. There, youth did not settle for memes; they played their role, and we too should play ours.
The dear writer should understand that giving a negative slant to lectures delivered in universities is unethical. The purpose of those lectures is to highlight the positive role of youth in the national economy and to reduce the distance created by negative social media information, which Pakistani youth have fully appreciated. The writer is Pakistani, and India is our neighboring country. Sir, millions of young Indians migrate every year to America, Europe, and Gulf countries. If the writer had checked the record of Indian youth in the place where he is writing columns, he would have understood the point. The real discussion should be: those youth who have gone abroad from Pakistan—have they completely disconnected from the country, or have they brought back capital, skills, and networks? In our friend country China, Generation Z faces strict regulations, firewalls, and censorship—the very things called “stubbornness of the old” here. Yet, China has integrated its young population into manufacturing, technology, and global trade in such a way that the world cannot ignore its economic power today. Differences exist there too, but the state has not “ended.”
The columnist’s impression that patriotism is born only from facilities is a superficial argument and reflects a specific mindset. Japan was completely devastated after World War II—no infrastructure, no resources, no sovereignty. But its younger generation did not become disconnected from the state; instead, they embraced discipline, education, and collective responsibility to succeed. Today, Japan is among the most organized nations in the world. Where states absorb the positive demands of youth into institutions, the system strengthens; where they turn it into a generational war, chaos increases. Here, youth are being deliberately steered toward a generational war under a specific planning. But our youth do not have the kind of thinking reflected in the column.
Freedom of expression has never meant lawlessness. Memes, satire, and social media are means of expression, but nations are not built through vandalism, arson, sieges, mockery, or dance parties. In France, Turkey, and Brazil, youth protested on the streets, but ultimately, political participation, voting, and policy dialogue proved to be the way forward. Here, the real issue is not that youth are angry; the real issue is that certain people are presenting their anger as a final defeat, which is a wrong thinking and impression.
It has not all ended. May Allah keep His mercy. Amen. This is a difficult phase for the country, not the end.
States end the day dialogue dies, and dialogue is still alive, even if bitter. We are a democratic country. The columnist presented a specific viewpoint in his column and did not include many real issues and real culprits in his targets. This should be considered a thoughtfully planned writing and not taken seriously. There was a lack of real content in the writing; it has a specific target. Although their decisions, their achievements, and their sacrifices are a source of pride for the youth, elders, children, and our sisters and mothers—this patriotism is embedded in the soul of the entire nation. There are praises for their actions in national security and protection, which perhaps our dear writer cannot digest.
