India’s history makes one fact unmistakably clear: however powerful authority may be, however deeply injustice is institutionalised, and however long exploitation persists, young people have repeatedly stood at the forefront of resistance. Students are not merely classroom citizens preparing for examinations and careers. They are also among the first to ask a fundamental question: What kind of society should we build, and what kind of country do we want to inherit?

This tradition has deep roots in India’s freedom struggle. From the Swadeshi movement of 1905 to the Non-Cooperation, Civil Disobedience and Quit India movements, students boycotted colonial institutions, organised demonstrations, spread nationalist ideas and faced arrest. When the British imprisoned major political leaders during the Quit India movement in 1942, students in several parts of the country helped sustain resistance. Historical records also document student participation in the movement in regions of present-day Andhra Pradesh.

Student activism was never confined to a single political ideology. Gandhian nationalism, socialism, communism and revolutionary politics all influenced different sections of young people. The formation of the All India Students’ Federation in 1936 gave student politics an important national organisational platform. In Assam, student organisations also connected educational concerns with wider social and economic issues, including support for workers’ struggles.

Bhagat Singh occupies a distinctive place in this history. His legacy is not simply one of courage and sacrifice. He believed that young people needed political education, critical thinking, reading, organisation and engagement with ordinary people. His 1931 document addressed to young political workers emphasised the importance of study and political understanding. For today’s youth, his most enduring message may therefore be that anger against injustice must be accompanied by knowledge, clarity and organised democratic action.

Student movements continued to shape Indian politics after independence. The anti-Hindi agitations in Tamil Nadu during the 1960s brought questions of language, regional rights and federalism into student politics. In 1974, the Nav Nirman movement in Gujarat began with student protests over inflation, corruption and governance and eventually contributed to the resignation of the state government and dissolution of the Assembly. In Bihar, student protests against inflation, unemployment and corruption developed into a wider movement under Jayaprakash Narayan.

Yet the history of student movements should not be romanticised. Some movements became vehicles for political parties; others witnessed violence; and political forces have sometimes attempted to exploit genuine student grievances. The strength of student activism therefore lies not in party loyalty, but in independent thinking, democratic methods, factual scrutiny and the courage to question those in power—irrespective of which party governs.

This principle has renewed relevance today. Education is not merely about obtaining degrees; it is an investment made by millions of families in their children’s future. When examination systems are compromised by alleged irregularities, paper leaks or questions over results, it is not only students who suffer. Public confidence in the state itself is damaged. Recent controversies surrounding national-level entrance examinations have demonstrated how deeply such failures can affect young people.

But students face challenges beyond examinations. The rising cost of education, inadequate resources in public institutions, unemployment and concerns about the quality of available jobs are major sources of anxiety. Social discrimination, communal tensions and restrictions on academic freedom can further undermine campuses as spaces for learning and debate. Universities need autonomy, resources and an environment where disagreement is treated as an essential part of education rather than as disloyalty.

The responsibility of young people, therefore, extends beyond securing personal employment. They must demand transparent education systems, question unemployment, oppose discrimination, defend constitutional rights and insist on accountability from public institutions. But such activism must remain democratic. Branding political opponents as anti-national is dangerous; suppressing dissent is equally damaging. Whether the government is led by the BJP, Congress or another political formation, the standard applied by young citizens should remain the same: constitutional values, democratic accountability and public interest.

Technology has given today’s youth unprecedented access to information and knowledge. But it has also created unprecedented opportunities for misinformation, propaganda and hate speech. The challenge is therefore not merely to produce an angry generation, but an informed one: young people who can distinguish evidence from propaganda, disagreement from hatred, and patriotism from unquestioning loyalty.

The real purpose of student activism is not simply to bring down a government or force a minister to resign. A resignation may establish accountability, but institutional reform creates lasting change. Cancelling a compromised examination may address an immediate crisis, but preventing future manipulation is the real solution.

Every generation faces its own test. Earlier generations challenged colonial rule, authoritarianism, corruption and social injustice. Today’s youth must confront inequality, unemployment, the commercialisation of education, social hatred, institutional weakening and excessive concentration of power.

Young people are not spectators in history. They are among its authors. Their greatest contribution to India’s future will not be measured by the slogans they raise, but by the questions they ask, the evidence they seek, the institutions they defend and the democratic society they help build.

The future of India will depend not simply on who governs, but on whether its young citizens remain informed, independent, courageous and committed to democracy.