There was something almost comical about a recent viral video from Ladakh in which a middle-aged woman, reportedly 40, was seen allegedly misbehaving with personnel of the Indian armed forces guarding the nation’s borders—and apparently presenting herself as Gen Z. If this is where the “Gen Z” label has reached, perhaps the Election Commission should consider adding one more card to the growing collection of identity documents: a Gen Z ID card.
At least then the country would know who is genuinely Gen Z and who has simply discovered the latest fashionable political passport.
Let us begin with the basics. Gen Z generally refers to those born roughly between the late 1990s and early 2010s. In 2026, that means predominantly teenagers and people in their twenties—not somebody comfortably cruising through middle age. Yet, in the new politics of protest, outrage and television debates, age appears to have become as flexible as political morality.
Today, apparently, anybody who shouts loudly enough, blocks a road, abuses a public servant or finds a camera can qualify as Gen Z.
The Ladakh episode, however, appears to have punctured that convenient fiction. If reports about the woman’s age are correct and the police have registered a case, the episode raises an obvious question: How far can the Gen Z label be stretched before it becomes meaningless?
This is not merely about one woman. It is about the increasingly casual manner in which political parties, activists and self-appointed protest leaders appropriate the name of an entire generation whenever it suits their narrative.
The irony becomes sharper when one recalls the protests over alleged examination irregularities. Legitimate grievances of students deserve to be heard and investigated. But legitimate student anger cannot become a protective shield for every person who joins a protest, nor can every agitator automatically be baptised “Gen Z” merely because the slogan sounds fashionable.
And this is where political opportunism enters the picture.
The Opposition—particularly parties such as the Congress, Samajwadi Party and AAP—has repeatedly shown a remarkable talent for converting almost every public grievance into a political battlefield. Once a protest begins, the familiar political machinery rolls in: speeches, cameras, hashtags, allegations and, inevitably, the discovery that the entire movement supposedly represents “the youth of Bharat”.
Really?
Bharat has hundreds of millions of young people. Surely the political class does not seriously believe that a few thousand protesters with microphones, placards and social-media accounts constitute the collective voice of an entire generation.
Even more amusing is the tendency of some political actors and media commentators to use “Gen Z” almost as a synonym for “anyone angry with the Modi government”. By that logic, tomorrow a 50-year-old political veteran could perhaps declare himself Gen Z after changing his WhatsApp display picture.
The Narendra Modi government, too, must learn an important lesson from this phenomenon. Recognising genuine youth concerns is strength; allowing every politically manufactured protest to acquire the status of a generational uprising is weakness. The government should distinguish sharply between genuine grievances and organised political exploitation of those grievances.
There is nothing wrong with listening to young Bharat. There is everything wrong with allowing political parties to hijack young India.
Perhaps, therefore, the tongue-in-cheek suggestion deserves serious consideration: during the ongoing voter-identification exercises, why not establish a clear, officially recognised demographic classification for Gen Z? Link it to existing identity databases where legally appropriate, and let the public know who actually falls within the generation being invoked so enthusiastically by politicians.
At least then the country might discover something hilarious: the so-called Gen Z revolutionaries may suddenly become considerably younger—or considerably fewer.
And perhaps political parties will finally stop manufacturing Gen Z whenever they need a convenient crowd.
Because being young is a matter of birth.
Being Gen Z is not a political costume.
