16 hours ago
- copy link
Chetan Bhagat, English novelist
Cockroach Janata Party or CJP became crores of followers in no time. But the vast majority of followers were on social media handles. Not on the streets. CJP did hold an actual meeting at Jantar Mantar and the media also covered it well. Still, only a few hundred or thousand people reached there. The arrival of even a minor celebrity in the malls of India attracts a bigger crowd.
Why was there such a difference between online and offline? Is Jen-ji lazy? Or are they not that dissatisfied and are living relatively comfortable lives? But this would be a generalization. The real reason goes deeper than this. Understanding CJP is, in a sense, a great way to understand current Gen-G.
The comparison being made is that CJP is not like the anti-corruption movement of 2011. This similarity makes sense. Both gave voice to the public’s disappointment. Both attracted the youth. Both emerged outside the traditional political framework. But CJP did not generate even the slightest public support as Anna Hazare did in 2011. But before that, we need to understand a bigger question: What happens when the digital-first generation, raised in the smartphone era, comes face to face with politics? Because this is the biggest difference between 2011 and 2026.
In 2011, the country watched almost the same major TV channels. People discussed the same headlines. The protests at Jantar Mantar became national news because everyone was on the same screen. Today the country lives in different digital realms made of algorithms. A student preparing for Civil Services Exam can watch UPSC related videos the whole day.
Others follow influential people associated with startups. The third watches makeup tutorials. The fourth lives in the world of political memes. Everyone is online. But they are not necessarily all experiencing the same reality. This makes it difficult to unite and organize people.
The 2011 movement had one issue: end corruption. The country knew what it was angry about and what it wanted. CJP’s case is different from this. Its supporters talk about many things – unemployment, competitive exams, paper leaks, rising cost of living, political arrogance, lack of opportunities, despair of the youth. These are all real concerns. The problem is that there are too many concerns. It is easier to organize the country on the basis of one grievance than to organize it on the basis of ten grievances.
Then the tone of both is also different. The anti-corruption movement was serious. Almost spiritual. People used to go to rallies wearing Gandhi caps. He even fasted! Whereas CJP emerged through humour. It is based on memes, satire, irony. It is also completely digital, allowing it to spread at incredible speed. But there is a problem with this system. Many people can participate in this. They will like and share it, but they will not necessarily come forward to be a part of the movement. And every content creator knows this bitter truth.
If millions of youth are getting involved with issues like employment and examinations, it does not happen when they are completely satisfied. The disappointment is real. The question is how it is being expressed. Older generations often see politics through physical action – demonstrations, protests, sit-ins, marches. But Gen-G has grown up with different tools – posting, commenting, sharing, creating content.
This is where misunderstandings arise between the old and new generations. An elderly person may ask, if you are so angry then why are you not on the streets? A youth may answer, if millions of people have seen my post, then what is the need to come to the streets? In 2011, if people felt they were not being heard, they would gather.
In 2026, if people feel they aren’t being heard, they post. On the one hand, social media has become a medium to amplify the voice, and on the other hand, it has also become a way to exert pressure. The Internet absorbs within itself a large part of the political energy that could once have taken the form of a movement on the streets.
This is not the story of a weak or lazy generation. This is the story of a generation that expresses politics differently. Who reaches for her phone before raising the protest banner. But can digital outrage change the real world?
(These are the author’s own views)
