Sociologist on “Gen Z regulates” demos: “What the CDU is doing is dangerous to the public”

taz: Mr. Teune, politicians and the media have been in a frenzy about the “Gen Z rules” protests for two weeks. How did you experience the protests?

Simon Teune: I would say that the protests were an expression of a widespread feeling among young adults and young people that they have no real prospects for the future. There are a lot of issues stacking up: the wars and the threat of conscription, the unchecked climate crisis, the structural deficiencies in the education system, the question of whether I can afford an apartment if I move out. This feeling connects the very different topics. And it feeds the perception that the political system is no longer seen as part of the solution, but as part of the problem.

Teune: There is an alienation among young people from democratic institutions and procedures. Politics is not experienced as something that can be shaped, not even through protest. The experiences of Fridays for Future are important. It was possible to bring a lot of people onto the streets - but what little was achieved is now being reversed. The feeling arises: This democracy has no answers to the challenges we are moving towards. That is the basic mood of the protests.

Simon Teune (50) is a sociologist at the Free University of Berlin and co-founder of the Institute for Protest and Movement Research. He has been researching protests and their cultural embeddedness for 25 years.

taz: But aren't the protests an expression of a democratic impulse?

Teune: Yes. Getting up and getting involved is always an expression of a democratic impulse. A first important democratizing effect is to experience yourself as an active person. But then I also have to have the feeling that politics is reacting to me. If the current approach to the protests, which is characterized almost exclusively by discrediting and repression, continues, we will be approaching a critical point.

taz: In the weeks before the demos there was already talk of “riot migrants” who could expect “no mercy” from the police. Now, after the protests, Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt is talking about “chaotics from the migrant milieu.” What are the implications of such speech?

Teune: That deepens this alienation. Those affected are told: “Not only are you not being heard, you don’t belong.” The Union in particular has apparently decided to pursue the AfD strategy and declare migration to be the cause of all problems. This racist interpretation declares entire sections of the population to be a problem and ignores social causes. In the context of precisely this discussion, there was a racist terrorist attack in France in which one person was shot and many were injured. This narrative is dangerous to the public - and it deepens the gap between politics and young people with a migration background - and that is 40 percent in this age group.

taz: Would you also describe looting, such as what happened in Frankfurt am Main, as a result of such a discourse?

Teune: We are still at the very beginning of reconstructing the events. But some dynamics in such situations are known from May 1st in Berlin. This includes the effects of an upstream media and political debate about violence. On the one hand, this means that the protests are only associated with violence, meaning that the content is hardly talked about anymore. And on the other hand, a debate like this also creates a horizon of expectations and thus a window of opportunity to break rules that normally apply. In this case, there are other factors involved.

Teune: For example, the influence of new orthodox communist youth groups that are oriented towards cadre organizations and have a revolutionary perspective. And then there was probably a certain dynamic on social media and in circles of friends to encourage each other. In the end, whether a riot actually breaks out has something to do with how the police act in the specific situation.

taz: In the media and politics, a clear distinction is often made between demonstrators and rioters, although the latter are denied that their concerns are political. How do you see that?

Teune: When it comes to riots and looting, the motives mix. For some political groups, throwing stones at the police and burning cars is a clear political strategy to create images of ungovernability and upheaval. And then there is the part for whom it is more of an opportunity to take control of the action and share in the wealth of society. It is a big mistake to depoliticize this, i.e. to wipe away the social background of such actions. They are political - even if those involved don't necessarily have a clear political agenda in mind.

taz: Would you say that the Gen Z protests are a social movement?

Teune: So far it's probably more of a series of protest events. There are a lot of movements coming together here: the antimilitarist movement, the climate movement, the education movement. Whether and how these actors will come together in the end is completely open. There were tens of thousands of people on the streets, which is a lot for Germany. That certainly shows potential. Protest movements rarely go from 0 to 100. They grow through organizing processes and networking.

taz: There is already talk about bans on demos for the upcoming protests on November 20th. Do such debates contribute to mobilization or do they harm?

Teune: Both can apply. Talking about bans on demonstrations first of all confirms the perception that politics is not part of the solution. This can lead to people taking to the streets even more determinedly. On the other hand, there will also have been people at the weekend who would have been willing to get involved in principle, but were also put off by the announcement of police violence. The tough police crackdown was communicated very clearly.

taz: “Gen Z regulates” has distanced itself very clearly and extensively from violence and has also advised against masking, for example. Was that important for legitimacy or is something like that also divisive?

taz: This is also an old debate. Some argue that once a protest is associated with violence, the chances of having an impact diminish. Others say that images of contradiction are needed to have a social impact, which is why you shouldn't allow yourself to be told how to demonstrate. Both can apply. That always depends on the exact circumstances.

taz: Education Minister Karin Prien (CDU) now wants to organize an education summit. Is this already a first success?

Teune: The fact that the perspective of young people is taken into account is definitely a success. That has hardly been the case in recent years. So attention is already a potential. On the other hand, after the Fridays for Future protests, there was even a ruling by the Federal Constitutional Court that rated intergenerational equity as crucial - but there were still no real practical improvements. So the announcement of a summit alone doesn't mean much.