We would like to thank Luisa Franco Machado and Tessa Dooms for contributing to TAI’s work on youth and democratic engagement. Their insights have informed and shaped this blog.
Across multiple contexts, philanthropic funders are encountering a growing body of evidence suggesting that many young people appear increasingly disengaged from formal democratic systems. For example, a 2025 United States poll of 18–29 year olds found that nearly a third of those surveyed expressed low support for core democratic principles. In Europe, around one in 10 Gen Z said they did not care whether their government was democratic or not. In Latin America, nearly 40% of young people do not trust their governments.
But youth are, in fact, organizing and driving change around the world, from climate justice and AI accountability to regime change protests. The true challenge is whether philanthropy can evolve from gatekeeping to companionship.
Recent convenings on democracy and civic space, including TAI’s Annual Learning Days, have highlighted the pivotal role of youth in reimagining democracy. In this blog, we share ideas on how to move from supporting isolated projects to strengthening the conditions, relationships, and capacities that enable young people’s agency and power.
Beyond the Feed: How Digital-Native Organizing is Rewiring Democracy
It is impossible to discuss modern youth organizing without addressing how digital-native activism is shaping who participates in democracy and how. Recognizing young digital activists as leaders of change is a crucial shift in how we value their work; and in how we understand online platforms as powerful tools for identity construction, connection, expression and political mobilization in the digital age.
Youth activism is becoming a structural force in governance: moving beyond simple protest to shape policy debates, elections, and oversight mechanisms. In 2025, a youth-led anti-corruption movement in Nepal was organized largely through Discord, TikTok, and other social networks. Viral videos and online discussions helped mobilize protests that ultimately forced the resignation of the Prime Minister and sparked a national debate on democratic reform. In Kenya, Gen Z-led protests against tax reforms in 2024 sparked a nationwide debate on fiscal accountability and government transparency.
During Nigeria’s #EndSARS movement, young activists created digital initiatives that monitored corruption and governance failures in real time. In Brazil, digital creators used humor and satire to deconstruct politics. The YouTube channel Porta dos Fundos, one of the largest comedy collectives in Latin America, reaches millions of young viewers who often bypass traditional political media.
However, the engineering of social media feeds is entirely dependent on corporate power. Algorithms dictate whose voices are platformed and whose are "shadow-banned". Authoritarians know this and are investing heavily in controlling the algorithms, implementing surveillance technologies, promoting online harassment, and disinformation campaigns. AI-generated deepfakes threaten to undermine trust in evidence itself.
Philanthropy and governments alike must recognize that digital infrastructure is now a form of democratic infrastructure.Defending digital civic space requires more than an enthusiasm for innovation. It demands investment in digital rights organizations, cybersecurity training, public-interest technology, and platform accountability. It requires legal safeguards that protect online expression and limit state surveillance.
Parallel to online organizing, movement-building continues to happen offline—in community centers, local marches, and informal gathering spaces. The Fridays for Future movement in Europe thrived because local action groups met and grew week after week. These on-the-ground efforts deserve equal attention and investment; researchers, observers, and funders alike should recognize that nurturing physical spaces of connection is as essential to democratic vitality as any online strategy.
Young people, when organizing, are driven by three core factors: being present and heard where decisions that affect their lives are made, achieving tangible and meaningful change, and doing so in community. Funders should follow this lead by resourcing the infrastructure that enables young people to experiment, make mistakes, debate, and build lasting trust, both online and offline.
Embracing the Mandate for Disruption
Younger generations mobilize around the possibility of transformation.
Gen Z initiatives are deeply embodied in decentralized, connected, horizontal, and community-based structures. These models rarely fit philanthropy’s traditional comfort zone. In sectors like climate justice, where youth mobilization has been central, less than 1% of global philanthropic funding goes directly to youth-led organizations.
This reality should prompt funders to ask a difficult question: How comfortable are we with disruption? Supporting youth power means backing movements that will inherently challenge established norms, including those within philanthropy itself. Authentic engagement means funding access and belonging, not just time-bound programs.
In addition, investing in youth leadership requires intergenerational collaboration. Supporting capacity building, safety, and mentorship so young organizers have the tools to act beyond reactionary cycles. It means creating structures where established leaders are willing to accompany, but also to listen, follow, and learn.
Funders seeking to support youth-led movements need to start by challenging the flattened image of youth and actively making room for plurality. Bringing younger voices "to the table" means very little if those seats are only accessible to the most privileged or most visible. True collaboration demands listening not just to young people as “a demographic”, but to young women, young people of color, young people from under-resourced communities, those wo does not speak English, and those whose perspectives have long been treated as edge cases rather than essential contributions. Only then can the conversation move from symbolic inclusion to genuine shared power.
It takes trust to fund people who might not have managed big grants before or who don't speak traditional "philanthropy language." But taking that leap will unlock societal change unlike anything else. It is already happening; it just needs sustained investment, flexibility, and a willingness to shift power.