Lately, Dhaka has increasingly become a city of protests, with people taking to the streets almost every other day to demand some kind of reform or change. Hardly a week passes without a group of protesters blocking a major intersection in the city, voicing grievances that range from governance failures to economic concerns. A few weeks ago, students of Government Titumir College, for instance, blocked roads and railways demanding that their college be upgraded to university status. Then we saw students from the Medical Assistant Training School staging a demonstration demanding better employment opportunities. The damage to our already struggling economy due to all these disruptions, particularly the traffic congestion they cause in the capital, is already proving far too heavy to bear. However, while social media is awash with conspiracy theories regarding who or what is instigating these movements, there is little meaningful discourse on why people, especially young people, feel compelled to resort to such measures.

Regardless of who is instigating what, these protests have proven time and time again that the only way to get a voice heard in Bangladesh is to shout as loudly as possible while also disrupting the lives of the common citizenry. But is this really the kind of political discourse that we want in the country?

Before the July uprising, several research and opinion pieces indicated that young people in Bangladesh were increasingly disengaging from formal political participation. Analysts highlighted that most young people not only lack the knowledge of key political processes, but also feel their voices will disappear into a bureaucratic void. While there was a glimmer of hope that things might change after the fall of an authoritarian regime, many people are now frustrated with corruption, economic hardship, and the perception that their concerns may ultimately not be addressed, especially when government feedback mechanisms appear superficial rather than effective channels for real change.

Similarly, a pre-uprising study on the political perception of youth in Bangladesh found that, despite high levels of patriotism, nearly 95 percent of respondents believed that politics was risky and unrewarding. A key reason cited was the absence of an accessible, unified system for engagement—one where feedback could effectively reach decision-makers and lead to tangible outcomes.

Considering the perception of politics held by the general youth in the country, the recent youth-led protests can be put into perspective. Creation of structured and effective platforms for engagement between the government and the people, particularly non-politically affiliated youth, has been long overdue in Bangladesh. As a result, instead of being actively involved in shaping policies and governance, young people often find themselves resorting to protests—and in many cases, violence—to express their concerns. Of course, having an activist mentality among the young of a nation is never bad. However, when activism and protests become the only language of youth politics, and when protests so regularly turn violent, they deter the majority of the youth from mainstream politics and exacerbates political instability in the country by driving people to be more reactive than proactive.

It is high time we started to create and support new forums that enable discourse between the youth and the government. That is the only way to break out of the cycle of protests and violence. Universities, community centres, and digital forums could all serve as mediums for open discussion, allowing young people to engage directly with policymakers. Civil society has to play a crucial role in this regard by routinely offering opportunities for open dialogue between young citizens and policymakers. One important initiative that the civil society can undertake is hosting regular youth-focused colloquiums in all regions of Bangladesh to highlight the youth's voice and their policy demands. In the same vein, political parties must build youth wings that prioritise policy formulation over partisan agitation, ensuring that young voices participate meaningfully in the national decision-making process. Furthermore, incorporating civic education into school curricula will foster a sense of duty and awareness in people from an early age. By teaching them about governance, political rights, and how to engage peacefully in the public sphere, the government could empower young people to engage constructively before resorting to protests and violence.

Ultimately, it is the public sphere of Bangladeshi politics that is the issue here. German philosopher Jürgen Habermas, known for his work on communicative action and democracy, coined the concept of "public sphere." According to Habermas, the public sphere is "made up of private people gathered together as a public and articulating the needs of society with the state." This idea of an inclusive public sphere, reimagined in Bangladesh's context, can offer a critical lens through which to understand this dilemma. A functional public sphere, untainted from partisan showmanship and undue vested interest, where young people can engage in open and meaningful discourse with policymakers, is essential for fostering democratic participation and reducing the need for disruptive protests. Political dialogue in Bangladesh needs to be taken off the streets and into proper public spheres, which can incorporate modern elements and technology such as online social networks and new media.

After a brutal uprising, it is the collective responsibility of all of us to come together and cultivate a politically engaged and peaceful generation. To that end, the government, civil society, and all political parties in the country must contribute to creating inclusive platforms and a public sphere that empowers young voices and creates structured spaces for political dialogues. By doing so, it can be ensured that the nation's unheard voices find space, and the next generation can contribute positively to the political landscape.

Apon Zahir is senior research associate at the Centre for Governance Studies (CGS).

Views expressed in this article are the author's own. 

Follow The Daily Star Opinion on Facebook for the latest opinions, commentaries, and analyses by experts and professionals. To contribute your article or letter to The Daily Star Opinion, see our guidelines for submission.