It Depends Is Not an Answer
Every time someone asked whether a protest was worth it, I gave the reply I heard from adults and commentators: it depends. On how disruptive it was, whether it stayed peaceful, whether there were “better ways.” All true and a way of not saying what I actually thought. I got tired of hearing myself do it.
In September 2025, that became harder to live with. After Nepal's government banned twenty-six social media platforms, a leaderless Gen Z crowd took to the streets to protest corruption. Within two days, the prime minister had resigned. Within months, an election swept in a younger politics. By Reuters' count, it cost more than seventy lives, most shot by the state they were protesting. The grievances had gone unanswered for years, but public safety became urgent the moment the streets filled.
That is the case “it depends” cannot answer, so I ask three questions instead. First, is the grievance serious and documented, or just a slogan looking for a cause? Second, have the ordinary channels, elections, courts, consultations, actually failed, or never existed at all? And third, the one I keep getting stuck on: is the pressure aimed at people who could fix things, or just at whoever is in the way? By that test, Nepal's protesters were justified. They had tried the ballot and the courts for years, only to get nowhere. The pressure fell mainly on the government, not on bystanders.
The third is the hardest to answer, but the second does the real work. A protest like this is justified only when the ordinary channels have genuinely failed, not when they are merely slow. Where institutions still function, where a vote counts and a complaint is heard, it is neither necessary nor justified.
Owning that position means owning its price. The line I have drawn would mean calling a protest justified even when dozens died. And I do not know how to be comfortable with that. A protest can be necessary and still be a tragedy. What I reject is the cleaner version that protests only count when they stay polite and never make power uncomfortable. That just lets power ignore anyone it finds inconvenient. Disruption that meets my three questions is earned; violence that outruns them is not. I know that is easy to say from where I sit.
Laying out every side and stopping felt responsible. But past a point, not deciding is its own decision. The next time a protest shows up, I would rather say what I think and be wrong than hide behind “it depends.” I still do not like the answer I landed on, but refusing to have one is worse.
