Gen Z protests: What’s behind them—and how exaggerated are the warnings?

Tomorrow, on October 31, a movement will take to the streets about which very little is known so far because it is only just developing. Under the name “Gen Z regelt”, a group of around 30 young people is calling for demonstrations in more than 30 cities. The demands for the Gen Z protests are set out in a position paper: money for schools, addiction services and psychotherapy instead of cuts, an affordable life, no compulsory military service, less surveillance, more climate protection. The homepage states in capital letters that the protest is to be peaceful, without exception.

But for a week now, almost nobody has been talking about these demands. People are talking about comparisons with France, where student protests culminated in looting and curfews, about alleged “criminals from the migrant milieu”, about “migrant rioters” (we will come to where the racism suddenly comes from), about military deployments and bans on demonstrations. But the concerns and warnings are not coming only from the right: a press spokesperson for the initiative resigned after one day, two well-known activists dropped out, and the Federal Student Conference distanced itself.

So: What do we really know about the movement demonstrating tomorrow? Who is accusing it of what, and how much of this is (racist) scaremongering? We have researched and sorted it out for you:

What does the Gen Z protest want?

The “Gen-Z-regelt” initiative has called nationwide for demonstrations in 34 cities next Saturday, October 31. In four cities, the protests are being organized by the initiative itself – in Cologne, Frankfurt am Main, Berlin and Munich. The respective cities are marked orange on a map. According to “Gen-Z-regelt,” all other cities on the map – marked in white – are cities that have joined the initiative. The initiative itself is not responsible for the content or organization of the protest there. Who is responsible instead is not explained.

Its demands cover a broad range of issues: more financial resources for schools, addiction services and psychotherapy, protection of fundamental rights, and consistent climate protection. They also oppose compulsory military service and support an affordable life. Furthermore, the younger generation should no longer bear the brunt of cuts; instead, the “burdens should be distributed fairly.”

The demands are explained in an initiative position paper. According to it, too much is being cut in areas such as education, social services, culture and healthcare. People’s concerns, such as rising living costs, taxes and poverty, are also receiving too little attention. At the same time, large corporations are benefiting while the population suffers from cuts. And: the “surveillance apparatus” is continually being expanded, while the shortage of skilled workers is exacerbating problems in schools, nursing and healthcare.

Worldwide protests by young people

Headlines about protests by young people are piling up. Looking at developments worldwide, it becomes clear that the wave of protests was already set off last year. In September 2025, people protested in Nepal because the government had blocked several social media platforms. Nineteen people died. In Madagascar, young people protested in September 2025 against poor water and electricity supplies; in Indonesia in August 2025 against excessive allowances for members of parliament.

In Europe, protests by young people gathered momentum this year. Since September, students in France have been protesting against a lack of teachers and dilapidated buildings. Other groups joined them to demonstrate against high living costs. In some cases, there were riots and looting. As a result, bans on assemblies and curfews were imposed in parts of several cities. But this is very important, because individual cases are being instrumentalized and exaggerated here: according to the WDR, the majority of people in France are demonstrating peacefully.

Regarding the students’ concerns in France, something has now happened: the government has presented a five-point plan by the education minister. The students welcome the plan, but nevertheless intend to protest again next Saturday.

The protests are partly similar worldwide in the methods used, including those employed here in Germany in the Gen Z protests. For example, participants primarily organize themselves on social networks and without the involvement of political parties or a leader. The protests also share the feeling that “their own generation is being made to pay for general inequality.”

Allegations of violence and racist prejudices by politicians and police

CDU politicians are warning about the nationwide Gen‑Z protests. Alexander Throm, the Union’s domestic policy spokesperson in the Bundestag, told the Handelsblatt that the demonstrations must not be “hijacked by left-wing extremist forces and criminals from the migrant milieu.”

Hesse’s interior minister Roman Poseck (CDU) likewise warned of an escalation of the protests: “We will not allow left-wing radicals in Hesse to dictate the appearance of our cities and set material assets and human values literally ablaze,” he told the Handelsblatt. He described it as “particularly alarming” “that the protests are also being infiltrated by left-wing extremists who let their violence run free.” More on these baseless accusations later.

Former supporters and students distance themselves

People who had initially become involved in the protests have already distanced themselves from the movement ahead of time. Content creator and student Gianni Matheja resigned as the initiative’s press spokesperson after just one day. In his statement on Instagram, he said as his reason that he no longer considered “a shared peaceful framework” to be “sufficiently safeguarded.” He continued: “For me, both belong together: standing up resolutely for our future while clearly rejecting violence.” However, the statement does not explicitly link the concept of violence to the movement.

Even outside the left-wing spectrum, not everyone shares the alarm. The City of Stuttgart states in its own press release that there is currently no indication of an unpeaceful demonstration and that there is no legal basis for a ban, as the CDU in the city council had sought to examine. And according to ZDF, Green Party leader Felix Banaszak warned against prematurely criminalizing the protests; the reasons why young people take to the streets must be taken seriously. This is remarkable because a public assembly authority and a party leader are saying the same thing as protest researchers: at the moment, there is simply nothing concrete on which to base the warnings.

Federal Student Conference cautious about the Gen Z protests

The Federal Student Conference’s response is more nuanced. It explicitly expresses solidarity with the demands for better education and peaceful protest, but does not support the demonstrations on October 31. Its statement says:

“Because of opaque organizational structures, we see the danger that young people’s serious concerns could become pawns in political instrumentalization and polarization. (...) We do not believe that violence is a solution, which is why we reject it and condemn its use.”

The statement does not address the extent to which, in its view, the initiative poses a willingness to use violence. The organizational structures of “Gen-Z-regelt” are also discussed in the statement by the two activists BATTAL Yali and Max from maximal.demokratisch, who likewise decided to withdraw from the movement: “Perhaps we are accustomed to different structures from other contexts and therefore apply standards that cannot be met from the outset by a young protest movement that is only just emerging,” their statement says. They “do not feel comfortable with the responsibility under the current conditions,” it continues.

No known concrete calls or plans for violence

What is behind these concerns that the Gen‑Z protests could be infiltrated by violent rioters? The unsatisfactory but honest answer: We do not know! But there are many arguments against street battles at Halloween:

For one thing, the “Gen Z regelt” movement clearly distances itself from violence on its official website: “Against all violence: Our protest is peaceful, without exception,” it says, and: “No place for extremism: Extremism, racism, ableism and hate have no place with us.” One of the initiators, whose name appears in the legal notice, also emphasized to taz that the protests are intended to be peaceful.

According to ntv, the Interior Ministry sees no concrete calls or plans for violence. Nevertheless, like the Berlin police, it is observing calls from “the left-wing extremist scene and, in isolated cases, groups from foreign-related extremism” mobilizing for the protests. Experts such as sociologist Sebastian Koos, who researches youth and protest movements at the University of Konstanz, consider riots like those in France unlikely. Unlike in France, the protests in Germany are less driven by anger and are organized and registered, he told Deutsche Welle.

The movement’s still somewhat uncoordinated organization, which probably helped lead activists to turn away, is not particularly unusual, Julien Grimm from the Center for Interdisciplinary Peace and Conflict Research at Freie Universität Berlin told ntv: “Especially in early mobilization phases, protests often emerge from informal networks, personal contacts and digital communication structures.” That was also the case with Fridays for Future. Fixed roles and structures, as well as more concrete demands, often emerge only later.

The movement itself therefore does not announce any violence and distances itself from it through official channels. The mobilization of extremist groups mentioned by the police and Interior Ministry remains vague and nonspecific.

Any demonstration can be infiltrated

Nevertheless, of course, no one can promise that nobody will disrupt or riot at these demonstrations. That is true in principle! Any demonstration can be infiltrated; any protest action can be used by extremists. Extremists from Freie Sachsen or the violent, ethnic-nationalist Landvolk movement also appeared at farmers’ demonstrations. Naturally, by no means everyone who protested was an extremist. But although the demonstrations were repeatedly infiltrated by right-wing extremists, politicians gave in to some of their demands.

https://volksverpetzer.de/analyse/landvolkbewegung-schwarze-fahne-bauern/

One can criticize wording in a post by a Gen-Z-regelt account that does not clearly condemn looting and calls on people not to allow themselves to be divided into “peaceful and violent demonstrators.” But calls for violence and glorification of violence look different. The previously non-extremist-seeming public image of “Gen Z regelt” and the rather scant indications of extremists among its ranks in no way correspond to the way right-wing and conservative politicians and media are currently trying to discredit and suppress the protests. Before even a single poster has been held up.

Yet the Union is not waiting, let alone showing that it is listening and understands what concerns young people. Federal Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt (CSU) already adopted during the riots in France the racist narrative of fascist U.S. President Donald Trump and his vice president JD Vance, who had identified immigration as the cause of the unrest. A claim rejected by French President Emmanuel Macron.

Protests as a platform for blatant racism

That does not stop Dobrindt and the Union from openly acting out their racism in relation to the protests. Dobrindt “knew” from afar that in France “a migrant milieu” had rioted together with left-wing extremists, and Merz knew that they were “unintegrated people, migrants.” These are simply unsubstantiated, racist claims being used to deliberately stir up public sentiment.

The same approach is continuing with the German protests, which have not even taken place yet: Alexander Throm, the CDU’s domestic policy spokesperson, warns without any evidence of a takeover by “criminals from the migrant milieu” and an “unholy alliance” with left-wing extremists. Jochen Kopelke, federal chairman of the Police Trade Union (GdP), even speaks in racist terms of “young migrant rioters who are eager to use violence against the police.” They should “expect no mercy from us.”

Riot politicians incite against the Gen‑Z protests with racism

The entire debate is riddled with racism. Groups are attributed a migration background that is nowhere substantiated and has nothing to do with the demands. Conscription, run-down schools, rents: these affect all 17-year-olds in this country, regardless of their parents’ names. Nevertheless, there seems to be something that the Union and the police union find even worse than (potential!) violent offenders: violent offenders with the “wrong” skin color. Here, migration is reflexively linked to crime, a far-right myth that research has repeatedly debunked.

In 2025, the ifo Institute evaluated the crime statistics of all districts and found no statistical connection between a rising proportion of foreigners and the local crime rate, including in homicide or sexual assault cases. International research has been saying the same thing for years: age, gender, poverty and place of residence are decisive, not one’s passport. And this debunked, far-right myth has unfortunately become so mainstream that a federal interior minister, the chancellor and his party can dictate it to the Bild newspaper without any evidence. Here, the Union continues to willingly pave the way to power for the far-right AfD:

https://volksverpetzer.de/analyse/plan-afd-union-setzt-um/

There was no “endgame scenario” in Erfurt.

This scenario of violence, which politicians, police and the media are currently building up far more actively than all the calls to protest combined, creates fertile ground for excessive countermeasures and police violence. Kopelke says it himself: expect no mercy. As a reminder: children and young adults are actually the ones who want to demonstrate here. Police measures should always preserve proportionality in relation to the current situation and should not already be advertised as merciless in advance.

The whole situation strongly recalls the protests surrounding the AfD party conference in Erfurt in July. At the time, police spoke of an “endgame scenario,” of hordes of militant left-wing extremists who could reduce Erfurt to rubble and ashes. None of that happened. There were isolated attacks on journalists, which must obviously be condemned, and a few paint bombs thrown at a building. Otherwise, tens of thousands protested peacefully, without burning trash cans and without stones flying.

We cannot predict what will happen on Saturday. But what we see clearly and repeatedly is how protests are demonized as violent from the outset. They are also linked to migration without cause in order to fuel racism. This creates room for suppressing the protest: if a huge threat scenario is constructed from the beginning, harsh police measures can be better justified. And then entirely different measures can be discussed as well:

Allegations of violence help suppress unwelcome voices

Then there are demands as excessive as those made by the CDU in Stuttgart’s city council, which would have preferred to ban the demonstration there – although, as mentioned, the city sees no reason to do so. And because it had to go one step further, Berlin’s Young Union even suggested deploying the Bundeswehr against the young people. The Bundeswehr! Against demonstrators, against students! Perhaps it was also a desperate attempt by the JU to convince the young people of compulsory military service after all. In any case, the Young Union members fail because of the Basic Law: for good historical reasons, the Bundeswehr may be deployed domestically only in extreme exceptional cases.

Inflating an alleged, unsubstantiated potential for violence gives politicians new opportunities to suppress unwelcome criticism. It is truly ironic: the younger generation is complaining because – rightly – it feels ignored and overlooked by politicians, and what do they do? They ignore all concerns, needs and demands, categorically label the demonstrators violent, speak about them in racist terms and try to suppress their protest by every means from the outset. At the very latest now, young people have every reason to be angry.

As with any newly organizing movement, none of us knows exactly what will happen at the individual demonstrations on Saturday. It will also vary greatly from place to place. Only in four cities are the demonstrations being organized by the original “Gen Z regelt” group. In many others, separate groups have formed, which may be organized in very different ways. Nor does anyone know how binding the tens of thousands of registrations on the website are. Clicking is quick; how many people will actually come is uncertain.

Conclusion & summary

We do not know what will happen tomorrow. No one knows exactly, and that is not an argument in favor of the Gen‑Z protests. What we do know is this: the initiative has distanced itself from violence in writing and repeatedly. The Interior Ministry knows of no concrete calls for violence, nor does the City of Stuttgart, and protest researchers consider French-style conditions unlikely. At the same time, it is also true that the movement is chaotically organized and assumes no responsibility for most cities. And people who were involved have withdrawn again for good reasons. This is not evidence of violence. It is evidence that a movement that is two weeks old is not yet a movement with established structures. Fridays for Future was not that way at the beginning either.

What can be very clearly substantiated, by contrast, is the pattern on the other side. Before a single person had demonstrated, it was already certain who would riot and what their skin color would be. The same rhetoric was used before Erfurt in July, when police expected up to 2,500 people willing to use violence. Tens of thousands came, and they remained predominantly peaceful, without a single arrest. Anyone who talks an escalation into existence creates the atmosphere they then want to combat. Protest researcher Wienkoop also points this out when she argues that an entirely different situation in France must not determine operational planning in Germany.

The Gen Z protests can also be given a chance for now

If the demands speak to you, go. It is your right, and no one has to justify in advance why they are demonstrating. But be aware that the movement is still very new and accordingly dynamic. Find out who is registering the demonstration in your city. Ask the local group what it plans to do, and leave again if the mood changes. Incidentally, this applies to every demonstration, not just this one.

A democratically organized movement that brings together a broad range of young people to take to the streets for common goals deserves a fair chance to prove itself. But exactly what will happen remains uncertain at present.