There are moments in history when the new collides with the old, when patterns emerge that can no longer be contained within the existing order. Viewed through the prism of cultural evolution, new patterns cannot be suppressed if they respond to deeper social changes and needs.
The ancient saying of Jesus, "You do not put new wine into old wineskins," warns that the spirit of the new age demands new institutions, values, and ways of communication. If the new tries to keep within the old framework, they will break down - either through sudden revolution or gradual erosion.
The old resists, often long and exhausting, and may temporarily triumph through force or manipulation. But if the new is authentic and appropriate to the times, the old form becomes increasingly untenable. The question is not whether change will occur, but at what pace and by what means. The key to success lies not only in the strength of the demands, but also in the ability of the new to create its own “mechanics” – the institutions, symbols, strategies and narratives that will sustain it.
How can we recognize that a social movement is authentic? Authentic movements do not arise from political and ideological constructions, but from real problems in society. Regardless of the spin of the authorities, this student protest is not the result of external centers of power, but an organic response to deep dysfunctions of the state.
This is confirmed by its spontaneity, inspiration, warm and sincere support of citizens, the creativity of its participants and the way it is organized - as a movement from below, without hierarchical control or imposed ideology. Its demands for a functional state, justice and freedom are not empty slogans, but a reflection of real needs. Its strength lies not in imposed directives, but in an inner sense of injustice and a desire for change.
When a social movement inspires hope and evokes strong positive emotions, it is recognized even by those not directly involved. It survives despite pressures because it is not based on fear, but on inner strength and a sense of meaning. The nonviolent resistance of the students, their refusal to react with hatred and aggression to violence, speaks to the moral superiority of their rebellion. History shows that such movements, although they may be temporarily suppressed, leave deep traces and become the seeds of future change.
Creativity, solidarity, perseverance and non-violence show that the student movement is not driven by short-term interests, but by a deeper vision. It uses new language, new forms of expression and new technologies, while the regime's responses are outdated - the iconography, inflammatory slogans and scenography of their rallies resemble unpleasant images from the last century.
Thus, in Sremska Mitrovica, we once again saw a concept that stands out from the modern way of communicating with citizens: the president on the podium, the crowd below him, brought to listen and cheer. This is the president's favorite principle of "acclamation", where the crowd confirms the leader's words with loud shouts, without any dialogue.
If an incompetent person is already making a completely flawed historical comparison of a peaceful student march - a symbol of civil resistance and democratic values - with Mussolini's militaristic March on Rome, which was the introduction to the fascist dictatorship, then they either do not understand history, or are deliberately distorting the facts, or are delusional.
Because on the contrary, his rallies, with their format - a leader on a high stage, a crowd cheering and confirming his words, incendiary rhetoric and lack of dialogue - are much more reminiscent of the performances of Mussolini, not to mention other dictators. Meanwhile, students are on the streets, mixing with citizens who support them, feed them and cheer them on. They are not an audience, but active and equal participants. The student rebellion is not a monologue from a stage, an imperial decree, but a continuous dialogue with society, networked in both the real and digital worlds.
What happens when new wine presses old wineskins? The only question is how long the old wineskins can hold out before they burst. And when they burst, will they try to stifle the new or will they transform themselves? The streets are not just a fight for the demands of the protests - they are a fight for a new way of communication, new values, and a new political culture.
When the zeitgeist changes, power structures have only two options: to adapt to it or to disappear along with the old mechs in which they tried to trap it.
The author is a psychotherapist
Bonus video:
