Generational Blame Is a Recipe for Disaster

By Muhammad Rabnawaz Awan

The debate between Generation Z and the so-called Boomer generation has moved well beyond academic circles. What once belonged to sociological inquiry has now entered the public square—often in the form of sharp accusations, viral slogans, and emotionally charged narratives. Increasingly, one generation is framed as enlightened and progressive, while the other is cast as the root of society’s failures.

This framing may be rhetorically powerful, but it is intellectually shallow—and ultimately unproductive.

Generation Z is frequently celebrated as the most informed cohort in history. Yet being surrounded by information is not the same as engaging in learning. To a certain extent, the generation also suffers from a subtle delusion of grandeur and self-righteousness. Many assume that dissenting voices are necessarily ill-informed or intellectually inferior, while their own awareness, shaped largely by social media consensus, often remains unexamined. Confidence is mistaken for comprehension; volume for validity.

What is frequently missing is the recognition that listening is wiser than preaching. Assertions such as “I know it all” may attract digital applause, but they rarely lead to understanding. Intellectual humility—the ability to accept that one’s knowledge is partial and revisable—is not a weakness; it is the foundation of wisdom. Without it, even legitimate concerns risk being reduced to slogans.

It is also essential to distinguish between opinion and fact. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but facts are not negotiable. They cannot be bent, distorted, or selectively framed to suit preconceived ideological or cult-like notions. When facts become casualties of narrative convenience, dialogue collapses and dogma takes its place.

It is in this context that I feel compelled to weigh in—not to defend one generation against another, but to question the logic of generational blame itself. Societies do not progress by replacing old dogmas with new ones. Populism, regardless of the age group that embraces it, thrives on emotional appeal, simplified binaries, and moral absolutism. Reason, by contrast, demands patience, dialogue, and intellectual humility—the willingness to listen, revise, and engage with complexity.

Today, the ability to think independently is no longer merely an academic virtue. In an age of algorithmic persuasion and constant emotional stimulation, it has become a moral necessity. Dialogue, not denunciation, sustains democratic culture. Understanding, not outrage, bridges generational divides.

My own perspective is shaped by a series of intellectual journeys: from extremism to tolerance, where rigid certainty gave way to empathy; from compliance to conscience, where blind following yielded to ethical responsibility; and from populism to reason, where slogans were replaced by substance. These transitions taught me a simple but unsettling truth: certainty without inquiry is fragile, and conviction without compassion is dangerous.

Bridging generational divides through dialogue, empathy, and critical thinking, emphasizing reason, intellectual humility, and independent thought over blame.

True education does not produce followers trained to echo fashionable opinions. It nurtures thinkers capable of resisting manipulation, questioning inherited assumptions, and engaging respectfully with disagreement. At its best, education equips individuals to hold strong beliefs without surrendering curiosity—and to argue without dehumanizing those who disagree.

This moment, therefore, calls for more than commentary; it demands action. Students must learn to question before they conclude. Educators must teach thinking rather than allegiance. Parents must model dialogue instead of dogma. In a time when emotions are easily mobilized and minds are quietly steered, choosing reason is an act of courage.

Pause before sharing. Question what you are being persuaded to believe. Seek evidence. Listen across differences. Resist the comfort of easy certainties. The path of reason may be slower and more demanding, but it remains the only path that safeguards intellectual freedom—and sustains a thoughtful, humane society.

About the Author

Muhammad Rabnawaz Awan is an educator, social awareness advocate, and the voice behind several impactful online campaigns aimed at reviving empathy and moral consciousness among youth. He regularly writes on issues of social decay, educational reform, and the urgent need for character-building in modern societies.

Read More: Pakistan courts Turkish investors as economic reforms begin showing results