Tear Gas, Flames, and Freedom: The Gen Z Movement in Nepal
Nepal has entered one of the most turbulent phases of its modern political history. In the first weeks of September 2025, a wave of youth-driven protests swept across the Himalayan nation, shaking the political establishment and forcing Prime Minister K. P. Sharma Oli to resign. What started as an outcry against a sudden social media ban quickly exploded into a nationwide movement against corruption, nepotism, and entrenched political privilege.
The protests left at least 19 people dead, hundreds injured, and major government buildings in flames. Security forces fired tear gas, rubber bullets, and even live rounds to disperse the demonstrators. The violence unleashed chaos on the streets of Kathmandu and other cities, with more than 13,500 prisoners breaking free from jails amid the turmoil. The crisis also pulled in Nepal’s army, which took control of key government sites and enforced strict curfews.
To understand the depth of this uprising, one must look at the roots of youth frustration, the spark that ignited the revolt, and the government’s heavy-handed response.
The Spark: A Ban on Social Media
The immediate trigger for the protests came from the government’s sudden decision to ban over 20 major social media platforms. The list included Facebook, YouTube, X (formerly Twitter), Instagram, LinkedIn, Reddit, and several messaging apps. Authorities justified the move by saying that these companies had failed to register with the government. Officials framed the decision as a matter of compliance, but young people interpreted it as an attempt to silence dissent and tighten control over free expression.
Gen Z Nepalis, who had grown up with social media as their primary space for discussion, creativity, and activism, saw the ban as a direct attack on their identity. The government underestimated how deeply these platforms had become woven into everyday life. Social media gave Nepali youth not only entertainment but also a voice in a system dominated by aging leaders and political elites.
Within hours of the ban, hashtags demanding freedom of speech and an end to government overreach began to trend, even though access required VPNs. Students, freelancers, influencers, and tech-savvy workers rallied online and then carried their energy to the streets.
The Anger Beneath the Surface
While the ban sparked the protests, it did not create the anger. The roots of frustration run far deeper.
Nepal’s political elite has long drawn criticism for corruption, nepotism, and inefficiency. In the years since the abolition of the monarchy in 2008, politicians have promised transparency and reform but delivered little. Citizens watched the same families and dynasties occupy the most powerful offices while ordinary people struggled with unemployment, inflation, and limited opportunities.
The protests carried a strong anti-elite message. Young demonstrators mocked the privileges of “nepo kids,” a phrase they used for children of politicians who secured powerful positions without merit. The youth accused leaders of stealing resources while leaving the next generation with poor infrastructure, rising debts, and limited hope.
For Gen Z, who make up a significant portion of Nepal’s population, this uprising represented not just a fight against censorship but also a rejection of a political system they view as broken.
Clashes on the Streets
As the protests spread from Kathmandu to smaller towns, the government unleashed security forces. Riot police deployed tear gas and water cannons against crowds that often carried nothing but placards and flags. Rubber bullets rained down on students who marched toward government buildings.
In some instances, security forces used live ammunition. The decision to open fire turned protests into deadly clashes. At least 19 people lost their lives, and hundreds suffered injuries, some of them life-threatening. Images of young demonstrators bleeding on the streets circulated widely through VPN-enabled social media, further fueling anger.
The violence did not stop at clashes. Protesters stormed and torched several iconic buildings. Flames engulfed the Parliament complex, the Prime Minister’s office, the President’s residence, and the central secretariat. Demonstrators also set fire to media outlets, including the headquarters of Kantipur Publications, accusing them of siding with the government.
As chaos intensified, jails across the country became overwhelmed. Guards abandoned posts during riots, and in the confusion, more than 13,500 prisoners escaped. Some of these escapees included individuals wanted in India, raising security concerns across the border.
The Fall of Oli
Prime Minister K. P. Sharma Oli faced mounting pressure as the protests intensified. For years, Oli had positioned himself as a strong nationalist leader, but his government’s decision to silence social media and its violent crackdown left him isolated. Political allies distanced themselves, and opposition leaders called for his resignation.
Eventually, Oli stepped down. His resignation marked a dramatic moment in Nepali politics, but it did not satisfy the demonstrators. The youth argued that simply replacing one leader with another would not fix the system. They demanded structural reforms, including a new constitution and a complete dissolution of the existing Parliament.
Oli’s fall symbolized the victory of people power, but it also exposed the fragility of Nepal’s democratic institutions.
The Army Takes Control
With Oli gone and police overwhelmed, Nepal’s army stepped into the power vacuum. Soldiers deployed across Kathmandu and other major cities, guarding burned buildings and enforcing strict curfews. Armored vehicles blocked entry to government zones, and checkpoints restricted civilian movement.
The army claimed it wanted to restore order, but its presence raised questions about Nepal’s fragile democracy. Citizens worried that military involvement could open the door to authoritarian rule. Still, many welcomed the soldiers because they offered security after days of unchecked violence.
The balance between restoring peace and respecting democracy now hangs in the hands of the generals.
International Reactions
The scale of the crisis caught the attention of Nepal’s neighbors and the global community. India, Nepal’s closest partner, issued travel advisories and urged its citizens to avoid unnecessary travel to the country. Turkey and other nations followed with similar warnings.
Foreign governments condemned the violence and called for dialogue. International human rights organizations criticized the use of live ammunition against protesters and demanded accountability for security forces.
The crisis also threatened to destabilize regional politics. India, already dealing with border issues and migration concerns, watched carefully as thousands of prisoners escaped, some of whom had criminal links across the border.
Compensation and Investigations
To calm the situation, the government announced compensation packages for families of the dead and promised free medical treatment for the injured. Leaders also set up an investigation panel to review the violence and examine whether security forces acted responsibly.
These measures did little to appease the protesters. For many, the crisis exposed decades of unaddressed corruption and political manipulation. Youth leaders dismissed compensation as a short-term fix that ignored the larger demand for systemic reform.
The Demands of Gen Z
At the heart of the uprising stands a generation that refuses to stay silent. Gen Z protesters have articulated demands that go beyond immediate political resignations. They call for:
- A new constitution that limits political privilege.
- Dissolution of the existing Parliament.
- Accountability for corruption and nepotism.
- Greater transparency in government decision-making.
- Freedom of speech and unrestricted digital rights.
These demands reflect a generation that values meritocracy, digital freedom, and accountability. Unlike older generations, which often viewed politics through the lens of monarchy versus republic or communism versus democracy, Gen Z seeks fairness, openness, and practical reforms.
How the Protests Changed Nepal
The Gen Z uprising has already left lasting marks on Nepal’s political and social landscape. Several key changes stand out:
- Collapse of Leadership: Oli’s resignation showed that even powerful leaders cannot ignore the demands of the youth.
- Digital Rights as Core Freedoms: The protests highlighted the importance of social media not just as entertainment but as a democratic tool.
- Youth Power: The uprising established Gen Z as a decisive political force that future leaders cannot dismiss.
- Exposure of Weak Institutions: The mass jailbreaks and burning of government buildings revealed how fragile state structures remain.
- Military’s Growing Role: The army’s intervention raised fears of authoritarianism but also reminded citizens of the state’s dependence on military power during crises.
What Lies Ahead
Nepal now stands at a crossroads. The protests forced a major political resignation, but the larger system remains intact. The army controls the streets, but it does not offer long-term solutions to the country’s governance crisis.
The real test lies in whether Nepal’s leaders can address the demands of the youth. If the government initiates constitutional reforms, cracks down on corruption, and ensures free digital rights, it may rebuild trust. If not, the cycle of protests and instability will continue.
Nepal’s Gen Z does not appear ready to back down. This generation has tasted the power of collective action, and it knows that the political elite fears its voice. Future leaders will need to adapt to this reality or risk repeating Oli’s fate.
Global Protests of 2025
The year 2025 has become a defining chapter in the history of global unrest. Across continents, citizens have marched, occupied, and clashed with authorities in movements that carry both local grievances and universal themes: anger at corruption, frustration with inequality, and rejection of elite privilege.
Indonesia: The “Dark Indonesia” Movement
In Indonesia, protests gathered momentum through 2025 under the banner of “Indonesia Gelap,” or “Dark Indonesia.” Students, workers, and civil society groups rallied against rising living costs, parliamentary privileges, and concerns about democratic erosion.
The spark came when reports revealed lawmakers enjoyed housing allowances nearly ten times the minimum wage in Jakarta. Citizens saw this as a symbol of the gap between elites and the working poor. Protesters blocked roads, burned tires, and vandalized government symbols. The demonstrations spread across provinces and refused to fade despite heavy crackdowns.
The government responded with a cabinet reshuffle. The President removed five ministers, including those responsible for finance and security. This marked a rare acknowledgment that the protests carried legitimacy. But the unrest had already claimed lives. At least 10 people died in clashes, including a 21-year-old delivery worker whose death became a rallying symbol.
“Indonesia Gelap” revealed the depth of anger simmering beneath Southeast Asia’s largest democracy. It showed how economic injustice can unite diverse groups against entrenched power.
China: Protests Over School Bullying
In a country where dissent rarely reaches the streets, China experienced an unusual protest wave. A bullying scandal in a small city triggered thousands to march in early August. Parents, students, and local residents demanded accountability from school authorities who failed to act.
What might appear minor compared to Nepal or Indonesia gained significance because it broke through strict censorship. Citizens openly challenged the state’s failure to address grievances. For many observers, the protests revealed deep frustrations with governmental unresponsiveness and the limits of justice in local systems. The swift state crackdown reminded the world of China’s intolerance of organized dissent, but the protests also signaled that even tightly controlled societies carry reservoirs of anger waiting for release.
France: The “Block Everything” Movement
Europe’s most visible protest of 2025 erupted in France. Under the slogan “Block Everything,” demonstrators shut down roads, disrupted public transportation, and marched across cities. Left-wing and far-left groups organized the mobilization to oppose austerity measures, inequality, and what they viewed as government instability.
France’s political class faced deep distrust. President Emmanuel Macron had appointed his fifth Prime Minister in just two years, fueling perceptions of chaos at the top. The protests turned confrontational. Police deployed 80,000 officers nationwide. Clashes left streets filled with smoke, and nearly 300 people faced arrest.
France’s movement underscored a broader European trend: economic austerity colliding with public frustration. Citizens felt squeezed between rising costs and leaders perceived as disconnected. The “Block Everything” movement expressed both anger and a yearning for political renewal.
Turkey: Opposition Under Siege
Turkey’s protests centered on the headquarters of the Republican People’s Party (CHP) in Istanbul. A court decision replaced the party’s leader, sparking outrage among supporters who saw the move as political interference. Demonstrators staged a sit-in, demanding accountability and protection of opposition rights.
Police used pepper spray and force to disperse crowds. Arrests followed, but the standoff symbolized deeper tensions in Turkey’s democracy. Many viewed the incident as another example of creeping authoritarianism and the erosion of institutional checks and balances.
While smaller in scale than Nepal or Indonesia, the Turkish protests reflected a global theme: citizens resisting attempts to weaken democratic representation.
Philippines: Tension Over the Scarborough Shoal
The Philippines experienced protests of a different kind—diplomatic and nationalist rather than purely economic. Citizens rallied after China announced plans to declare a marine reserve that included the disputed Scarborough Shoal. For Filipinos, this move represented another attempt by Beijing to assert dominance in the South China Sea.
Protesters demanded strong action from Manila. They called for defending sovereignty and rejecting China’s “10-dash line” claims. The demonstrations drew attention to how maritime disputes can mobilize public anger and transform into nationalist movements. While less violent than other uprisings, these protests highlighted the intersection of geopolitics and citizen activism.
Conclusion
The protests of 2025 illustrate how global discontent transcends borders. Nepal’s Gen Z burned government buildings. Indonesian workers united under the banner of “Dark Indonesia.” Chinese citizens broke silence over a bullying scandal. French demonstrators shut down entire cities. Turkish opposition supporters fought for their right to representation. Filipinos defended sovereignty in the South China Sea.
Each protest speaks its own language, but together they form a chorus of defiance against corruption, inequality, and repression. The year has already shown that people, especially the young, will not stay silent. Whether governments choose reform or repression will shape not only their own futures but also the political landscape of the coming decade.
Also Read – Top 10 Plane Crashes That Shocked the World
