Of… generations, blocks and marches
l
the generations They are more than just demographic cohorts; They are social constructions that emerge from shared historical experiences and that shape ways of seeing the world. Karl Mannheim proposed that generational position is not enough to define an identity; A collective consciousness is required that is articulated around critical events. Thus, the baby boomersgeneration millennials and generation Z are not only differentiated by age, but by the stories they construct about themselves and by the symbolic struggles waged by political and social actors of each generation to impose their values in the public space.
Their identities are heterogeneous, contradictory and subject to dispute. That is why generations are extremely weak categories for social science analysis and political debate. It is necessary to recognize the difficulties in generalizing specific identities and identifying internal tensions that generations face between stated ideals and material conditions in which they live. Contemporary politics plays out in these contradictions, where social actors in each generation not only inherit the world, but reinvent it in the midst of conflicts over meaning and power.
Generation Z is the most connected and vocal in history, but lacks the organizations, movements, and institutional channels to translate their activism into real political action. The fragmentation imposed by social networks facilitates imposture: the superficial assignment of a homogeneous identity to a group that expresses itself in a diverse and contradictory way. This condition makes Z fertile ground for simplistic labels – “the generation woke up”, “the climate generation”, “the opposition to Sheinbaum” – that make their internal differences invisible and reduce their complexity to slogans, while the energy of their causes is diluted in ephemeral campaigns and viral trends.
In this context, black blocs now operate, a protest tactic that was born in Europe in the 1980s and became popular in anti-capitalist and anti-globalization mobilizations. In Mexico, they have appeared at feminist marches, October 2 commemorations, and other social protests. Their actions include graffiti, destruction of street furniture and confrontations with the police, which generates strong controversy: for some, they are a legitimate expression of resistance against the structural violence of the State; for others, shock groups that distort social demands and facilitate the criminalization of protest.
In a context where social networks amplify images of confrontation, the tactic makes fatigue visible, but also feeds narratives that justify repression and delegitimize broader movements. These characteristics facilitate the infiltration and even the imposture of provocateurs of diverse origins – who disguise themselves with these symbols and methods –, generate confusion and give way to situations of greater violence and repression.
The November 15 march was presented as a non-partisan youth mobilization under the name “generation Z.” From its origin the call was ambiguous and fragmented. It emerged on social media with messages that mixed legitimate outrage over violence and corruption with images generated by artificial intelligence and cultural symbols such as the One Piece flag. The absence of identifiable spokespersons and the proliferation of newly created accounts fueled suspicions about their authenticity.
Participation in the demonstration was considerable. However, the low participation of young people – to whom the original call was attributed – has opened a set of polarized interpretations. Even so, it is still relevant that an important sector of citizens decided to participate despite the confusion of content and convening groups.
The content of the march reflected this lack of clarity: legitimate demands – greater security, transparency and demilitarization – along with personal attacks – xenophobic, sexist and racist – and unsustainable accusations against President Sheinbaum. This mix of specific claims with insults, requests for Trump to intervene and expressions from conservative religious groups showed the lack of political cohesion. The confusion was worsened by the violent events in the Zócalo. What began as a peaceful march ended up overshadowed by the emergence of an alleged black bloc, and an excessive response from the police forces.
All of this has given rise to a confrontation of biased interpretations and disqualifications without a solution, to a polarized and sterile debate that magnifies or diminishes the importance of the march. In the midst of the exaltation and information hysteria, the arguments and political approaches of different actors and political forces are hidden in this discussion. In the end, those who bet on confusion and decomposition win. The rest of us lose.
* Specialist in political sociology of higher education and social movements
