Around the world, young people are taking to the streets, challenging governments and demanding answers about the future they believe is slipping away from them. From France to Milan, Italy, demonstrations have become a powerful expression of frustration over education, the cost of living, economic inequality and political leadership. But what is really driving these protests? Are students fighting for better schools and a more secure future, or are they becoming part of a larger movement against the governments of the day?

The answer is that both forces are at work, but the protests do not all have the same cause. In France, the student demonstrations that began in September 2026 grew out of concerns about the country’s public education system. Students complained about teacher shortages, overcrowded classrooms, deteriorating school buildings, long school days and uncertainty about their opportunities to enter higher education. What started with disputes over staffing and resources at a school on Creteil, neat Paris, spread to schools across the country. Social media helped students share their frustrations and encouraged others to join.

The movement has since expanded beyond the classroom. Teachers, parents, unions and other members of the public have joined demonstrations, connecting the education dispute to wider concerns about public services, living costs and inequality. For many students, the issue is not simply whether their school has enough teachers. It is whether the government is investing adequately in their future and giving young people a fair chance to succeed. The demonstrations have also become a political challenge for President Emmanuel Macron’s government. The governments response, including its handling of blockades and confrontations with police, has become another source of anger.

Some demonstrations have remained peaceful, while others have involved vandalism, fires and violent clashes. Those incidents have complicated the movement and raised questions about public safety, police conduct and the distinction between legitimate protest and criminal behaviour. The important point is that the French protests did not begin simply as an attempt to remove the government. They began with specific complaints about education, but those complaints have opened the door to a much broader debate about the country’s direction.

In Milan, the picture is different, although some of the underlying frustration overlaps. Demonstrations in Italy have brought together students, labour groups, anti-war activists and other protesters opposing policies associated with Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s government. Their concerns include rising living costs, low wages, government priorities and military spending. Protest in Milan escalated into clashes, vandalism and looting during demonstrations in October. Further rallies were called in several Italian cities, prompting the authorities to increase security and investigate incidents connected with the unrest. For many participants, the argument is about more than one government decision. It concerns the kind of society Italy is becoming, the opportunities available to younger generations and whether political leaders understand the financial pressures ordinary people face. However, it is important not to treat everyone in a demonstration as having the same motivation. A student protesting education policy, a worker demanding higher wages and an anti-war activist may march together without agreeing on every issue.

Why are students becoming such a powerful force?

Young people have several reasons to feel that they need to make themselves heard. The cost of housing, education and everyday necessities can make independence increasingly difficult. Students may worry that even after completing their education, they will struggle to find secure employment or afford a home. Young people want to believe that hard work and education will lead to a better life. When classrooms are overcrowded, public services deteriorate or access to further education feels unfair, that promises becomes harder to trust. There is also a growing generational divide. Some young people believe political leaders are more responsive to established interests than to the needs of those who will live with the consequences of today’s decisions for decades to come. Students can circulate videos, expose local problems and organize demonstrations far more quickly than earlier generations could. A dispute at one school can become a national issue within days. Finally, many young people feel that traditional political channels are not delivering results quickly enough. When petitions, public consultations or conversations with officials appear ineffective, taking to the streets can seem like the only way to attract attention. That does not mean all young people share the same political beliefs. Some want more government spending, some oppose regulations, and others simply want institutions to work better. Their common ground may be frustration rather than a unified political ideology.

Is this about rebelling against the government? This is perhaps the most important question. In many protests, opposition to government policy is certainly part of the story. Demonstrations want political leaders to change course, reconsider spending decisions or accept responsibility for problems that have gone unresolved. But opposing a government policy is not necessarily the same as wanting to overthrow the government. When people believe their concerns are repeatedly ignored, they may stop seeing a problem as an isolated policy failure and start questioning the government’s overall priorities. At that point, a protest about schools or household expenses can become a broader expression of dissatisfaction with the political system.

France illustrates how quickly that transformation can happen. Italy illustrates how concerns about living standards and governments decisions can bring different movements inti the same streets. Political parties may also try to benefit from public anger, either by supporting demonstrators or accusing their opponents of encouraging disorder. That can make protests more politically charged, even when the original grievances came from everyday experiences. The key is to look what protesters are demanding rather than assume that every demonstration is simply an anti-government rebellion.

The biggest question is whether governments will respond with meaningful changes or rely primarily on policing and public-order measures. In France’s unrest remains a significant political challenge. In Italy. Meloni government has responded to unrest in Milan with additional security deployments, while demonstrations continue to raise questions about wages, living costs and government priorities. Governments face a difficult balancing act. They must protect public safety and prevent violence, but they must also recognize that peaceful protest is a legitimate way for citizens to demand change.

The demonstrations in France and Italy reveal a question that extends well beyond Europe: what happens when a generation begins to believe that the system is not working for it? These protests are not all about bringing down governments. They are about education, economic security, equality and the desire to have meaningful voice in decisions that shape the future.

Ultimately, the measures of these movements will not be how many streets are blocked or how many arrests are made. It will be whether governments listen, whether meaningful solutions follow and whether young people regain confidence that their future is worth investing in. When students take to the streets in such numbers, political leaders should recognize that they are hearing more than a protest. They are hearing a generation asking whether anyone in power is listening.

Vincent BlacK/MS

Olivia Chow vs. Brad Bradford… Is this a defining moment for the city?

Toronto’s upcoming municipal election is about much more than choosing a mayor. It is a referendum on the direction of Canada’s largest city: how it should grow, how it should spend taxpayers’ money, how it should tackle housing affordability and congestion, and how it should balance the needs of motorists, cyclists, businesses and neighbourhoods. The contest between incumbent Mayor Olivia Chow and councillor Brad Bradford raises a fundamental question: Does Toronto want to continue along its current path, or does it want a different approach to governing the city?

Polls will inevitably shape conversation. But there is an important distinction between what a poll measures today and what voters will decide on election day. The latest polling available as of October 19 suggests a competitive two-candidate race, with Olivia Chow ahead but Brad Bradford having gained ground. Olivia Chow 52%… Brad Bradford 46%. The numbers tell an interesting story. In September, an Ipos poll for the Toronto Star gave Chow a 15% lead over Bradford. These are not identical surveys, so they should not be treated as a perfectly consistent trend line. Nevertheless, they show that Bradford has become substantial challenger and that the size of Chow’s advantage depends on the poll and when it was conducted. The margin of error also matters. A six-point difference in one poll is not a guarantee of the result, and the report margin of error does not account for every possible source of polling error.

Why the race has become so important…

Olivia Chow is seeking another term after taking office in 2023. Her record includes difficult budget decisions, property-tax increases, housing initiatives and efforts to expand public services. Supporters can point to continuity and her experience in office; cities can question the cost of city government and whether residents are seeking enough improvement in their daily lives. Brad Bradford, a Toronto city councillor and urban planner, has built his mayoral campaign around public safety, congestion and the cost of living. His campaign argues that Toronto needs a different approach to delivering results for residents. The contrast is not simply between two personalities. It is between different approaches to the city’s priorities, spending and management.

For voters, the central questions are practical…

• Are housing and living costs becoming more manageable?
• Are public transit and roads working well enough for residents and businesses?
• Do people feel safe in their neighbourhoods and on the TTC?
• Are property taxes and city services in a reasonable balance?
• Is City Hall responding to the concerns of residents across the entire city?

Those questions will help determine how voters judge both candidates.

Do the polls influence voters? 

Absolutely, polls can influence the political atmosphere, although they do not necessarily determine how people vote. There are four important effects to consider. Momentum… when a challenger closes a polling gap, supporters may become more energized. Strategic voting…. voters who prefer another candidate may decide to support one of the two leading contenders. Complacency… a lead can encourage supporters to feel confident and stay home. Media coverage… a tight contest attracts attention and forces candidates to defend their records.

The advance polls are playing a big significance these days to determine the outcome of races. The last municipal election had a significant turnout that those votes determined the last mayoral race and giving Olivia Chow the win through its advance voting. This is a significant development. It means many voters have already made their decision before October 26. The final stretch of the campaign must therefore focus on voters who have not yet voted, as well as eligible voters who did not participate in advance voting.

The candidates’ differences are very clear when their proposal is examined issue by issue. You can get all their positions by going to their official web sites. These are campaign positions, not guaranteed outcomes. The candidates have disputed each other’s records and costs, feasibility and effects of their proposals. For instance, Bradford’s proposed tax freeze raises a question about how the city would maintain services and fund infrastructure without increasing property-tax revenue. Chow’s approach raises a different question: whether keeping future increases near inflation would provide sufficient revenue while making life more affordable.

Could this election be a turning point in Toronto’s history? Yes, it could make an important political turning point, although the extent of that change will depend on the election result and what the next administration accomplishes. If Olivia Chow wins a second term, a victory would provide a mandate to continue her governing approach. If Brad Bradford wins a victory would represent a change in mayoral leadership and a mandate to pursue his campaign priorities. 

Toronto’s mayor does not govern alone, city council, the provincial government and the federal government all influence what can be accomplished. A change in mayor would not automatically resolve the housing crises, traffic congestion or the city’s financial pleasures. The October 26 municipal election is an important test of public confidence in Toronto’s leadership.

The real turning point will not simply be who wins the mayor’s office. It will be whether the next mayor can turn campaign promises into visible improvements in the lives of Torontonians. On October 26, voters will choose the direction. The next four years will determine whether that choice delivers the change they expect.

Vincent Black/MS