1 Ivana Milojević, 2 Nataša Pantić
1 Senior Lecturer in Futures, Edinburgh Futures Institute, Institute for Education, Community and Society Moray House School of Education and Sport and College of Arts, Humanities and Social Science, The University of Edinburgh
2 Professor in Educational Change and Diversity at the University of Edinburgh
Abstract
This article explores the youth-led protest movement in Serbia as a case of democratic resistance and future-making in the face of authoritarianism. Sparked by a public tragedy – the collapse of a railway station canopy that killed 16 people – the student-led uprising has developed into a powerful civic mobilisation calling for institutional accountability, justice, and systemic reform. Drawing on ethnographic observations, public statements, and student-produced materials, the article situates the movement within both local historical legacies and global democratic struggles.
The protests are analysed not only as a political response to state corruption and the erosion of public institutions, but as a cultural and generational effort to reclaim democratic values, the public commons, and national identity from autocratic capture. Students have reappropriated national symbols and historical narratives to support an inclusive vision for Serbia’s future – one grounded in rule of law, participatory governance, and social solidarity. Operating through decentralised, non-violent, and self-managed structures, the movement draws on traditions of samoupravljanje (self-management) and revitalises the practice of zbor (grassroots assembly) to model alternative democratic forms.
In addition to documenting successes and setbacks, the article considers four possible scenarios for Serbia’s political trajectory, ranging from democratic reform to authoritarian intensification. Ultimately, it argues that the movement has already initiated a form of irreversible change by restoring public imagination, breaking cycles of fear and silence, and affirming the liberatory potential of collective action. It thus contributes to broader debates on youth agency, resistance under autocracy, and the future of democracy in the post-Yugoslav region and beyond.
Keywords: Authoritarianism, democratic resistance, nonviolent movement, youth-led protest, student activism, Serbia.
Introduction: Why Pay Attention to a Student-Led Movement in Serbia?
“At a time when resignation to the most brutal and cynical forms of domination is almost ubiquitous in the West, it is possible to refuse oppression and rebel … The movement of students and youth in Serbia reminds us that we cannot separate the goal and the means, and that democracy is not an external goal but a practice, the very life of the movement. In that, this movement is an exemplary model for us.” (Rancière, 2025)
The global resurgence of authoritarianism is reshaping political landscapes and profoundly affecting how young people imagine, narrate, and strive to create their futures. In this context, student and youth-led movements have re-emerged as powerful sites of dissent and democratic imagination. The current youth uprising in Serbia – manifested through prolonged university blockades, public protests, and grassroots organising – stands out as a critical example. It represents not only an outcry for justice and the rule of law, but also a renewed belief in the possibility of a more just and democratic future. For many citizens, including those who had become disillusioned or resigned to political despair, the movement has rekindled a fragile sense of hope.
These acts of resistance are unfolding against a wider backdrop of intensifying attacks on academic freedom and university autonomy across the world. In the United States, recent student protests against the war in Gaza and/or Pro-Palestine activism have been met with police violence, suspensions, and legal repercussions (University World News, 2025; The Guardian, 2025) – signalling an erosion of the university as a space for critical debate and dissent. Across other contexts – from the Hungarian government’s takeover of the University of Theatre and Film Arts (SZFE) in 2020 (Radio Free Europe, 2020), to the forced relocation of Central European University (CEU) from Budapest in 2019 (Central European University, 2018), or the state repression of student activism in India (Banerjee, 2023) and Turkey (European Students’ Union, 2021) – university campuses have become key battlegrounds where struggles over democratic values, public knowledge, and youth agency are being waged.
In Serbia, these dynamics are compounded by a legacy of authoritarian governance, deep political polarisation, and systemic precarity. Yet amidst this, the student-led movement signals not resignation but a reassertion of collective agency. It demonstrates that future-making is not a passive act of waiting, but a political, cultural, and social practice – anchored in the present and informed by the past in order to transform oppressive conditions into spaces of possibility (Appadurai, 2013). While rooted in its local realities, the Serbian movement speaks to wider global shifts in the political and social order of our time.
At the time of writing, all public universities in Serbia have been under student blockade for several months. This essay offers a snapshot of a movement still in the making – an attempt to document, reflect upon, and learn from a moment in which young people are not only resisting authoritarianism, but actively reimagining democratic life.
The Future Students Want
“We are here to fight for our political lives and country… for freedom… freedom this government violates on a daily basis.” (Student protesters cited in Gercama, 2025)
“Our students want the institutions to do their proper job. These are our youth, our students, our future.” (Student supporter in Gercama, 2025)
The student-led protests were catalysed by the collapse of a railway station canopy, which resulted in the deaths of 16 people and left one person seriously injured. Widely seen as “the straw that broke the camel’s back”, the incident was the latest in a series of tragic events – from school shootings to other deadly incidents – that have come to symbolise the broader failures of governance. Protesters argue that these events are part of a deeper systemic crisis, shaped by the privatisation of public resources, entrenched corruption, and escalating state control over media. Serbia, they contend, is a “captured state”, in which “regulatory institutions, media networks, and patronage systems all serve the ruling SNS [Serbian Progressive Party]” (Kostić, 2025).
While the early demonstrations took the form of spontaneous memorials – vows not to forget the victims and demands for accountability – they quickly expanded into blockades of all public universities following the attack (by later-identified members of the SNS) on students during a peaceful student memorial (Marković, 2024). Since December 2024, most public universities and schools have been blocked, suspending normal operations. The movement has since drawn support from a wide range of groups: cultural workers, farmers, lawyers, bikers, and more, joining in solidarity with the students. At the same time, reflecting the broader societal polarisation, the movement has become a target of intense critique and hostility.
Initially, the student protests focused on four concrete demands:
- The publication of all documentation related to the reconstruction of the railway station.
- The dismissal of all charges against students, activists, and citizens arrested or detained during earlier protests, particularly in Novi Sad.
- The filing of criminal charges against all individuals who attacked students, professors, and members of the public.
- A 20 per cent increase in the budget allocated to faculties. (RTS, 2025)
Over time, however, the movement’s demands have broadened. Students are now also calling for early parliamentary elections, arguing that the current government is either unwilling or incapable of addressing their core demands. As such, what began as a response to a specific tragedy has become a national movement against authoritarianism and corruption – united by a shared demand for transparency, justice, and democratic renewal.
These protests have taken the form of marches, blockades, and demonstrations, as well as strikes by barristers, cultural workers, and teachers becoming emblematic of a broader struggle for civic dignity and institutional accountability. At the heart of the movement remain students and educational institutions – spaces increasingly targeted by reprisals. These have ranged from verbal threats, withheld salaries, and contract terminations to proposed legal reforms designed to curtail university autonomy. In response, some universities have resumed operations via asynchronous or synchronous online teaching – whether under internal pressure, external coercion, or both.
A vision for the preferred future has been clearly articulated by students on numerous occasions. One notable example occurred during a protest in the city of Niš on 1 March 2025, where students publicly read the Student Edict – a declaration outlining core principles such as freedom, justice, dignity, youth, knowledge, solidarity, and the future. It encapsulates the ethical and political aspirations of the movement and reflects a deeper desire to reimagine the role of education and civic life in Serbia. The Edict, reproduced in full in the appendix, affirms that freedom is not a privilege granted by power, but a fundamental right inseparable from dignity; that the state must serve its citizens, not individuals in power; that justice depends on the independence of institutions; and that young people are not only the future, but the constitutional defenders of the present. The students call for knowledge to be valued above obedience, and for solidarity to replace division, insisting that Serbia can and must become a country where power serves the people, not the other way around.
Over six months of mobilisation, students have consistently made efforts to transcend the entrenched divisions and polarisation that have long characterised Serbian society. Their rhetoric and action have largely emphasised inclusivity, diversity, and unity around a shared vision: the fight against corruption, the defence of democratic rights, and the affirmation of the rule of law as the foundation of freedom.
A particularly powerful moment of solidarity occurred during a 14-day rally outside the National Broadcaster (RTS). As Orthodox students in Belgrade celebrated Easter, Muslim students from Novi Pazar travelled to the capital to take their place in the protest line. During this handover, a war veteran addressed the students and their families with a message that captured the spirit of the movement: “You can rest easy – there are no more ‘our’ and ‘their’ children.” (Balunović, 2025)
This moment stands as a striking break from the nationalist rhetoric that dominated post-Yugoslav politics. It may well signify a generational transformation: a shift towards a renewed civic unity, forged from the intergenerational memory of a once-multicultural state and shaped by a collective aspiration for a more inclusive and democratic future.
The Past Resonance: Freedom-Loving People
“Where the rule of law is well established, and where power is well organised under the law, there is freedom, there is liberty. But where one or more command by their own will, heed not the law, and do whatever they please – there is no freedom, no security, no good, only lawlessness and banditry, merely under another name.” (Božidar Grujović, 1805)
As every vision of the future rests on a particular interpretation of the past, the student protests in Serbia have engaged in a nuanced negotiation of historical narratives. During these protests, we have observed a striking blend of conflicting storylines: on one hand, those shaped over the past thirty years by the rise of ethnic nationalism; on the other, multicultural narratives more aligned with the Yugoslav concept of “brotherhood and unity.”
Students have been navigating this symbolic terrain through several notable interventions. For instance, they frequently articulate values consistent with EU democratic principles, while simultaneously wrapping themselves in the Serbian national flag – a symbol long associated with anti-EU, ethnic nationalist sentiment. This juxtaposition is seen to reflect an attempt to reclaim national symbols in support of an inclusive, democratic vision, rather than exclusionary or authoritarian agendas.
A particularly illustrative moment occurred on 15 February 2025 – Serbia’s Statehood Day, also known as Sretenje – when a student publicly read the Student Letter during a protest in the city of Kragujevac (Nedeljnik, 2025). The speech made repeated references to the Sretenje Constitution of 1835, Serbia’s first constitutional document adopted in Kragujevac, which established the separation of powers – legislative, executive, and judicial – and enshrined principles such as judicial independence and the equality of citizens (Ustav Kneževine Srbije, 1835). The speech drew a powerful parallel between this historical constitution and the present-day struggle, referencing Professor Božidar Grujović’s 1805 statement – cited at the beginning of this section and echoed in the Student Letter. This statement underscored a central point: that liberty cannot exist without the rule of law. The student speaker also evoked the memory of Serbian rebels under Đorđe Petrović (Karađorđe), who led the first Serbian uprising against Ottoman rule, not merely as a military revolt, but as a sustained call for liberty by a “freedom-loving people.”
Like many nations, the people of Serbia pride themselves on being a slobodarski narod – a “freedom-loving people”, “free people”, or “people of liberty”. This self-image has been repeatedly invoked throughout history to articulate the desire for freedom and resistance against oppression – whether during colonisation by the Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian Empires or under Nazi occupation during the Second World War. Yet, despite liberation from foreign powers and the enduring “slobodarski narod” narrative, Serbian citizens continue to experience restrictions on their freedoms under autocratic governance.
The widespread protests unfolding since November 2024 are thus part of a much longer lineage of resistance. This lineage includes hajduci – guerrilla fighters during Ottoman rule; partizani who resisted Nazi occupation in the 1940s; the 1968 student protests demanding democratisation under Tito’s regime; the 1990s civic uprisings against the regime of later-convicted war criminal Slobodan Milošević[1]; and more recent protests “against dictatorship” and “against violence” since 2017.
Throughout the current wave of mobilisation, protest discourses have consistently drawn on and reinterpreted this past – diagnosing Serbia’s present condition and projecting the possibility of a different future. As proclaimed in the speech on Sretenje, the past, present, and future are intimately intertwined:
“Where are we today, two centuries later?
We have enormous public dissatisfaction.
We have demands to establish – or rather, restore – institutions.
And we have a situation where all levers of power are held by a single man.” (Nedeljnik, 2025)
Importantly, rather than fuelling nationalist division, students’ efforts to reclaim historical memory in support of a renewed civic vision are evoking national pride in the service of pluralism, legality, and democracy. As in all societies, there are multiple pasts to draw from. The past can be mobilised to support and strengthen a particular vision of the future – yet such discursive formations must respond meaningfully to the current moment and the issues at hand.
The Path Is the Way
To support their vision for the future, students have consciously chosen the opposite of authoritarian leadership. They do not have a single leader but operate collectively. Their spokespersons are selected during closed meetings and rotate regularly – almost every time, a different face speaks on behalf of the students.
A crucial feature of the movement is its refusal to create centralised leadership that could become a target for state repression or co-optation. Instead, students self-organise and make collective decisions during plenum sessions, where each step is subject to a vote. These sessions are open to all students within each faculty. The decisions of faculty-level plenums – seen as a form of direct democracy – are then discussed at the university level and across different universities. As it may be expected in a large base social movement, they to have their contradiction. However, their aspiration remains broad inclusion and nonviolence.
Their actions are also focused on advancing the rule of law. In doing so, they have already facilitated social change by emboldened others to join the movement. Cross-country student marches have been met with cathartic displays of solidarity and empathy – gestures that recall the long-forgotten legacy of brotherhood and unity. A wave of solidarity also spread across the region, with like-minded groups expressing support. This, in turn, led to accusations of “foreign influence” and so-called copycat tactics, particularly from Croatia, where references were made to Blokadna kuharica (A Cookbook for the Blockade), a text published in Zagreb (Centar za anarhističke studije, 2009), which was cited as a supposed blueprint for orchestrating disruptions in Serbia.
While there is no definitive evidence that Blokadna kuharica informed the students’ strategy, the organisational model they adopted clearly aligns with a broader historical repertoire of decentralised and participatory resistance, including the Socialist Yugoslav tradition of samoupravljanje (self-management) and more recent OTPOR! (RESISTANCE) movement (Popović et al., 2007). During socialist times, attempts to democratise the workplace were accompanied by participatory local governance practices. These practices have now been revitalised through a renewed form of zbor – serving as a means of reclaiming grassroots communal assemblies (Gočanin & Gajić, 2025). While there are notable differences, strategies pioneered by OTPOR! are also evident—particularly in the movement’s visual aesthetics and symbolic repertoire.
This reimagined zbor model aims to extend direct, participatory democracy beyond the student movement and into the wider population. Alongside the student protests, such practices pose a significant challenge to existing autocratic structures. Yet the students remain committed to their core principles: they commonly do not interfere with decisions made at the communal level and uphold self-governance as a supreme organising value.
Through direct encounters, rare appearances in independent media, and the highly creative use of social media, students have projected a wave of fresh energy and ideas. A noteworthy feature of the movement is its humour, lightness, and playfulness. The production of witty memes and satirical content online and during protests reflects not only the students’ creativity but also provides insight into the kind of society they envision – one that values joy, freedom, and the ability to laugh even in the midst of struggle.
Critiques, Failures, and Successes
It is unsurprising that the most vocal and energetic criticism has come from the government itself. This group includes those who have benefited – and continue to benefit – from the current regime: for example, directors and employees of public companies whose positions were secured through party affiliation, as well as ideological allies of the conservative ruling party. Both the President of Serbia and the President of the National Assembly have led a campaign portraying student protesters and their supporters as “Serbia haters.” They have organised counter-protests and worked persistently to discredit the movement. Numerous conspiracy theories have been circulated in the hope that one – or several – might ‘stick’. Protesters have also been accused of exploiting a tragedy for political gain.
A second source of criticism has come from those whose lives and livelihoods have been severely disrupted by the protests and blockades. This includes people who experienced restricted freedom of movement due to road closures or were unable to access institutional services because of university and government blockades. Among some university staff, there is growing frustration over the financial repercussions of prolonged closures – many have lost their only source of income due to government-imposed penalties. Others cite blocked access to offices and project-related activities – including collaborations with industry partners – which has resulted in missed deadlines, lost contracts, and further financial strain.
Another frequently voiced critique concerns the strategies employed by the students. While many in this group support the movement’s goals and values, they are critical of the use of blockades and large-scale disruption to everyday life. From this perspective, it is often argued that regime change should come through electoral processes – not through protests in the streets.
A further critique targets the perceived lack of a clear vision for the day after. Critics argue that the movement has not sufficiently articulated a concrete strategy for political transition or systemic reform. A subset of this critique sees the students’ tactics as paradoxical – for instance, trying to compel institutions to function by blocking those same institutions, or demanding the rule of law while simultaneously breaking certain laws, such as using university spaces for political organising or infringing on others’ rights to work and freedom of movement. An additional argument here is that it is ultimately pointless to block a sector – public, state-funded universities – which are largely ignored by the general public and perceived as elitist and not concerned with everyday economic problems of citizens.
These criticisms have contributed to a wider discourse around the imminent failure of the movement – despite its rapid early growth. As with all social movements, there are ebbs and flows, and what some describe as change fatigue. Many people are weary from repeated attempts to transform society, only to encounter entrenched resistance, backlash, or regression. One notable example of such backlash is the government’s proposal of a new law that would further undermine the financial stability and institutional autonomy of state universities (Radio Slobodna Evropa, 2025a).
Despite these challenges, the movement has registered several important successes. It has maintained sustained political pressure on the regime and pushed for greater public accountability, while remaining formally outside of party politics. The protests have already resulted in marginal, yet symbolically significant, changes – such as the resignations of the Minister of Construction and the Prime Minister. More recently (May 2025), six political activists were released from detention into house arrest as a direct result of protest pressure. One of the students’ key demands – the repetition of the election process for members of the Regulatory Body for Electronic Media (REM) – was met after 14 days of protest at the headquarters of Radio Television Serbia. In response, the Serbian Parliament agreed to restart the selection process, after which the students lifted the blockade (Radio Slobodna Evropa, 2025b).
As mentioned earlier, the student protests have sparked a wave of civic participation across Serbia, cutting across age, class, and profession. Over the course of just weeks and months, the movement was joined by hundreds of thousands of citizens from all generations and walks of life: university professors and other educators, high school pupils who closed their schools for months, unpaid teachers, pensioners, agricultural workers, lawyers, engineers, actors, and other cultural workers – many of whom held banners supporting the students at the end of their performances. Bikers and army veterans took to the streets to defend students from possible “rent-a-thug” groups sent to disrupt peaceful gatherings in Belgrade and across the country. Hundreds of taxi drivers mobilised to help return student protesters to their hometowns following national rallies held in every major university centre in Serbia. Peaceful vigils, protests for victims, and more recently “A Student in Every Village” campaign (Beta, 2025), were held in towns and villages across the country – providing, for many, a rare break from regime-controlled media narratives. In doing so, the movement has succeeded in shifting public opinion in its favour, even in the face of smear campaigns against the academic elite, restricted access to free media, and widespread disinformation propagated through state-aligned outlets.
More recently, the movement has expanded its efforts internationally. Students have cycled to Strasbourg and run a relay ultra-marathon to Brussels to ensure their voices are heard within European institutions (BIRN, 2025). The Serbian diaspora has also organised demonstrations and activities abroad. Thousands within the international academic community have expressed support for the students’ cause (Direktno, 2025), as have members of the European Parliament (Slobodna Dalmacija, 2025).
Scenarios
The purpose of scenario-building is to clarify available choices and move beyond a singular notion of the future – a mindset often dominant in times of conflict or deep uncertainty. Based on current discourse and observable trends, we outline four commonly discussed scenarios concerning the possible impact of the youth-led movement on Serbia’s political trajectory:
1. The More Things Change, the More They Stay the Same
In this scenario, only marginal or cosmetic changes occur, while the structural problems targeted by the student protests remain fundamentally intact. This outcome closely reflects what has transpired during the first six months of the movement. The government appears to be pursuing a “smokescreen” strategy: buying time, exhausting public patience, and relying on protest momentum to diminish. In this version of the future, the status quo continues unabated.
2. Increased Authoritarianism
This scenario has been unfolding in parallel with Scenario 1. Many members of the ruling party – and the conservative right more broadly – are calling for harsher, more repressive measures. While state violence has thus far been sporadic and relatively contained, it has nonetheless been present. A widely discussed controversy involved the alleged use of a sonic weapon during one of the largest gatherings in Belgrade – an allegation the government continues to deny. Other incidents have included protesters being injured by vehicles, as well as physical assaults involving batons, pushing, and intimidation. This scenario foresees an escalation in both the frequency and severity of such measures, contributing to a more entrenched authoritarian state.
3. Escalation to Targeted or Widespread Violence
As in many societies today, Serbia remains deeply polarised. There is, therefore, a real – though not highly probable – possibility of large-scale violence erupting between opposing factions. This could include targeted attacks on prominent political figures, from either side of the divide. The likelihood of such an escalation will depend heavily on how the government manages future demonstrations, particularly whether repression intensifies. This scenario projects a dangerous deepening of political polarisation, potentially culminating in widespread intergroup violence.
4. Gradual Shift Towards Reform
This is the most optimistic scenario, involving new elections and a peaceful transition of power. After 27 years in politics – including a term as Minister of Information from 1998 to 2000 – and 13 years in power, the resignation or electoral removal of the current autocratic leader would mark the beginning of this shift. The process could be aided by Serbia’s ongoing EU accession path, which remains the preferred direction for the majority of the population (Al Jazeera Balkans, 2023)[2]. In this scenario, reforms move beyond rhetoric towards genuine implementation, and Serbia aligns more closely with European Union policy frameworks. Tangible structural changes are initiated, and progress becomes measurable.
As for the short-term outlook, Scenario 1 is expected to predominate. The eventual outcome will largely depend on the government’s willingness to respond to the protestors’ outstanding demands – and the capacity of the movement to sustain pressure over time.
The worst-case scenario would be an escalation into violence (Scenario 3); the best-case scenario would be a peaceful democratic transition (Scenario 4). While the latter may not align with the interests of the ruling elite – or with those whose livelihoods are tied to the existing regime – it remains the most desirable path for the majority of Serbia’s population.
However, an alternative reading suggests that the student movement has already triggered irreversible change. It has demonstrated the liberatory power of collective self-organisation in the face of authoritarianism. It has reawakened empathy and solidarity in a society long traumatised by conflict and has set a new generation on a course that refuses to tolerate silence or fear in the face of injustice.
Conclusion
“The night is darkest just before the dawn.” (Blokade.org, 2025)
All social change unfolds at the intersection of three key forces: a vision for the future, the pushes of the present, and the weight of history and social structures (Inayatullah, 2013, 2023; Milojević, 2023, Milojević et al., 2024). The student-led movement in Serbia is no exception.
The students’ vision begins with a call for justice – for the victims of the railway station collapse, and for reforms that might prevent such tragedies from happening again. At its core, this requires confronting corruption, ensuring accountability, and rebuilding the integrity of public institutions. None of this is possible without an independent judiciary, a free press, and an autonomous academic sector. These, in turn, must be grounded in the rule of law – only possible within a more democratic society, where freedom of speech is protected and authoritarian control is curtailed.
This vision also includes a shift towards more participatory models of governance, starting within universities and expanding into broader political life. Citizens must have greater influence over the decisions that shape their lives. A further pillar is the revitalisation of the public commons: education, healthcare, and infrastructure – areas whose neglect harms society as a whole – must be prioritised in building a fairer and more sustainable future.
As with any movement, the external environment presents both opportunities and obstacles. Working against the students’ vision are the interlinked crises – economic, political, and ecological – affecting Serbia and the wider world, alongside a perceived global drift towards authoritarianism, even within long-established democracies.
Yet there are also enabling conditions. The democratising potential of social media and digital tools has enhanced the capacity for rapid mobilisation and exposed government actions to public scrutiny. The global momentum of resistance to authoritarian tendencies has helped fuel Serbia’s student protests. A growing awareness of what kind of future is not wanted – marked by repression, surveillance, and unchecked power – has galvanised diverse movements, under different banners and in different places, but united in opposition to the resurgence of “strongman” leadership. Different ongoing protests are incorporated into students’ protests and go hand in hand, for example ecological protests against lithium mining support students’ protests and vice versa.
Still, the weight of history and entrenched social structures constrain this vision. Serbia has a long and complex relationship with authoritarian rule, even within formally democratic systems. Narratives of the “strong father of the nation” persist, with the current president equating criticism of himself or his party with attacks on the nation itself. Protesters are frequently labelled as “auto-chauvinists,” “foreign agents,” or “domestic traitors” – tropes with deep historical roots. The ruling party continues to manipulate competing national and European narratives to serve its interests.
As always, the future remains open. The direction this movement takes – and what Serbia will look like in the years or decades to come – will depend on three main factors:
- The strength of the vision, and the extent to which it is collectively embraced and sustained.
- The alignment of local, regional, and global forces, and whether these enable or obstruct democratic reform.
- The role of historical memory and institutional legacies – particularly how dominant interpretations of history, often shaped by those in power, may serve to entrench the status quo, or alternatively, how re-engaging with suppressed or alternative histories can help loosen these anchors and support transformative visions.
Social change is never easy, nor painless – and rarely immediate. Yet the student movement in Serbia has shown that meaningful transformation does not require perfection or instant results. Its approach may not yield swift or sweeping reform, but it offers something essential: a clear path toward a systemic change beyond political power shifts, metaphorically expressed as “deep ploughing of the system”, and grounded in persistence, imagination, and the refusal to remain silent in the face of autocracy and corruption.
In that refusal, and in the solidarity it has inspired, the seeds of a different future have already been sown.
References:
A.D. (2025, March 2). Šta piše u “Studentskom ediktu” koji je predstavljen na protestu u Nišu [What’s written in the Student Edict presented at the protest in Niš]. N1 Vesti. https://n1info.rs/vesti/sta-pise-u-studentskom-ediktu-koji-je-predstavljen-na-protestu-u-nisu/
Al Jazeera Balkans. (2023, January 26). Za članstvo Srbije u EU 43, protiv 32 posto građana [43% support Serbia’s EU membership, 32% against]. https://balkans.aljazeera.net/news/balkan/2023/1/26/za-clanstvo-srbije-u-eu-43-protiv-32-posto-gradjana
Appadurai, A. (2013). The future as cultural fact: Essays on the global condition. Verso Books.
Beta (2025). Održana akcija “Student u svakom selu”, u okolini Pančeva [The action ‘A Student in Every Village’ was held in the vicinity of Pančevo]. https://www.021.rs/story/Info/Srbija/406165/Odrzana-akcija-Student-u-svakom-selu-u-okolini-Panceva.html
Balunović, F. (2025, May 12). Something extraordinary is happening in my country. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/12/opinion/serbia-protests-students-vucic.html
Banerjee, S. (2023, November 10). India’s students are increasingly targeted for protesting state failures. D+C – Development and Cooperation. https://www.dandc.eu/en/article/india-students-are-increasingly-targeted-protesting-state-failures-recent-clashes-jadavpur
BIRN. (2025, April 4). Serbian students cross Hungarian border on bike ride to Strasbourg. Balkan Insight. https://balkaninsight.com/2025/04/04/serbian-students-cross-hungarian-border-on-bike-ride-to-strasbourg/
Blokade.org. (2025, March 15). Prvi govor studenta sa protesta 15. marta [The first student speech from the 15 March protest]. https://blokade.org/prvi%20govor.pdf
Centar za anarhističke studije. (2009). Blokadna kuharica: Ili kako je izgledala blokada Filozofskog fakulteta u Zagrebu. https://anarhizam.info/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/blokadna-kuharica.pdf
Central European University. (2018, December 3). CEU forced out of Budapest, to launch U.S. degree programs in Vienna in September 2019. https://www.ceu.edu/article/2018-12-03/ceu-forced-out-budapest-launch-us-degree-programs-vienna-september-2019
Direktno. (2025, May 10). Evropski parlament dao podršku studentima u Srbiji [European Parliament gives support to students in Serbia]. https://direktno.rs/vesti/svet/582376/evropski-parlament-podrska-studenti-protesti.html
Doyle, W. R. (2006). Adoption of merit-based student grant programs: An event history analysis. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 28(3), 259–285.
European Students’ Union. (2021, May 26). Solidarity with student protesters and civil society in Turkey. https://esu-online.org/policies/solidarity-with-student-protesters-and-civil-society-in-turkey/
Gercama, I. (2025, January 30). “We are done with corruption”: How the students of Serbia rose up against the system. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jan/30/we-are-done-with-corruption-how-the-students-of-serbia-rose-up-against-the-system
Gočanin, S., & Gajić, I. (2025, March 12). Studenti pozivaju na samoorganizovanje: Koliko je realna ideja zborova? [Students call for self-organisation: How realistic is the idea of zbor?]. Radio Slobodna Evropa. https://www.slobodnaevropa.org/a/zbor-studenti-srbija-organizovanje-plenumi/33345216.html
Grujović, B. (n.d.). Slovo o slobodi [On freedom]. Narodni Front. http://narodni-front.org.rs/bozidar-grujovic-slovo-o-slobodi/
Inayatullah, S. (2013). Futures studies: Theories and methods. In F. G. Junquera (Ed.), There’s a future: Visions for a better world (pp. 36–66). Madrid: BBVA.
Inayatullah, S. (2023). The Futures Triangle: Origins and iterations. World Futures Review, 15(2–4), 112–121. https://doi.org/10.1177/19467567231203162
Kostić, R. (2025, March 21). Uprisings in Serbia: Struggles against a resilient regime. PRIF Blog. https://blog.prif.org/2025/03/21/uprisings-in-serbia-struggles-against-a-resilient-regime/
Marković, N. (2024). Fotografije napada batinaša na student I profesore FDU koji su odavali poštu poginulima u Novom Sadu [Photos of the attack by thugs on FDU (Faculty of Dramatic Arts) students and professors who were paying tribute to the victims in Novi Sad.] Nova.rs https://nova.rs/vesti/drustvo/napad-besnih-vozaca-na-neduzne-studente-i-profesore-fdu/
Milojević, I. (2023). Contextualising conflict: The Futures Triangle. World Futures Review, 15(2–4), 122–132.
Milojević, I., Inayatullah, S., & Poocharoen, O. (2024, July 3). Artificial intelligence, water futures, and a living constitution: Using the Futures Triangle to envision novel futures for Thailand. Journal of Futures Studies: Perspectives. https://jfsdigital.org/articles/artificial-intelligence-water-futures/
Nedeljnik. (2025, March 15). Tekst koji treba da ostane zapisan za istoriju: Pročitajte celo studentsko pismo koje je izazvalo ovacije više desetina hiljada ljudi u Kragujevcu [A text that should remain written in history: Read the full student letter that caused ovations in Kragujevac]. https://www.nedeljnik.rs/tekst-koji-treba-da-ostane-zapisan-za-istoriju-procitajte-celo-studentsko-pismo-koje-je-izazvalo-ovacije-vise-desetina-hiljada-ljudi-u-kragujevcu/
Popović, S., Milivojević, A., & Đinović, S. (2007). Nenasilna borba u 50 tačaka: Strateški pristup svakodnevnoj taktici. Samizdat B92. https://canvasopedia.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Nenasilna-Borba-u-50-tacaka-fin.pdf
Rancière, J. (2025) PhD in One Night collective & Edicija Jugoslavija. Our students are self-educating wonderfully: A dispatch from the Serbian uprising. Verso Books Blog. (2025, May 29). https://www.versobooks.com/blogs/7114-our-students-are-self-educating-wonderfully-a-dispatch-from-the-serbian-uprising
Radio Slobodna Evropa. (2025a, May 27). Novi zakon o visokom obrazovanju: Više kontrole, manje autonomije? https://www.slobodnaevropa.org/a/srbija-novi-zakon-visokom-obrazovanju-kontrola-studenti-fakulteti/33427745.html
Radio Slobodna Evropa. (2025b, May 3). REM izbori vraćeni Skupštini Srbije [REM elections returned to the Serbian Parliament]. https://www.slobodnaevropa.org/a/rem-izbor-skupstina-srbija/33399278.html
Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. (2020, October 21). Hungarian students, artists protest government’s takeover of famed film school. https://www.rferl.org/a/hungarian-students-artists-protest-government-s-takeover-of-famed-film-school/30901261.html
RTS. (2025, April 13). Protest studenata ispred zgrade RTS-a [Student protest in front of the RTS building]. https://www.rts.rs/vesti/drustvo/5630303/studenti-blokade-zgrada-rts.html
Slobodna Dalmacija. (2025, May 6). Svjetska akademska zajednica uz studente u blokadi: Eminentna imena uputila oštar apel srbijanskim vlastima – pročitajte [Global academic community supports students in blockade: Eminent figures issue strong appeal to Serbian authorities]. https://slobodnadalmacija.hr/vijesti/regija/svjetska-akademska-zajednica-uz-studente-u-blokadi-eminentna-imena-uputila-ostar-apel-srbijanskim-vlastima-procitajte-1462899
The Guardian. (2025, March 20). Gaza protests show how US universities are cracking down on student dissent. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/mar/20/donald-trump-gaza-protests-us-universities-palestine-arrest-sanctions
University World News. (2025, May 29). Global reaction to Serbia’s student uprising grows. https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20250529164358751
Ustav Kneževine Srbije. (1835). Sretenjski ustav [The Sretenje Constitution]. https://projuris.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Ustav-Knezevine-Srbije_Sretenjski-ustav-1835.pdf
Appendix
The “Student Edict”, read in the city of Niš on 1 March 2025
“On Freedom
Serbia is a land of free people.
Freedom is not a mercy, but a fundamental right inseparable from the dignity of every citizen.
Freedom is the foundation of our democratic society, our laws, our speech, and our thoughts.
On the State
The state is the common good of all its citizens.
The institutions of Serbia must serve the people and be the foundation of trust, and not an instrument of individual power.
We stand for a state where the law is the supreme authority, and where holding political office means serving the citizens, rather than enjoying privilege.
On Justice
Justice is the cornerstone of a stable society.
An independent judiciary, free media, and institutions must act in accordance with the law, and not under political pressure.
Equality of rights must be a reality for every citizen of Serbia.
On Youth
Young people have shown that they are not merely heirs of Serbia, but its constitutional defenders.
Students, as the bearers of this struggle, uphold the values upon which our society should rest.
The youth of Serbia demand a system based on merit and knowledge.
On Dignity
We advocate for a society that respects the dignity of every individual.
Dignity means that no person should be humiliated because of their beliefs or opinions.
We envision a Serbia where experts are not undervalued, where knowledge is valued more than obedience, and where young people see hope in their own country.
On Knowledge
Knowledge is the foundation of every society’s progress.
We demand a Serbia that prioritizes investment in science, research, education, and culture as key pillars of development.
Universities must be independent centers of excellence – not arenas for diploma trafficking and political influence.
On Solidarity
The roads of our cities – from Niš to Novi Sad, from Belgrade to Kragujevac – bear witness to the power of national unity.
This solidarity, previously unknown to systems built on division, has become our vow and our strength, which we will defend and nurture.
By turning individual voices into a force for change, we have proven that Serbia is not a patchwork of conflicting interests, but a community of citizens who share a vision of the future.
On the Future
Let this Edict be our obligation, our promise to one another – that we will build a state that belongs to all, where every child can dream big dreams.
A state where justice and freedom are stronger than any individual, and where power does not use the people, but serves them. (A.D., 2025)”
- A comprehensive overview of the non-violent movement against repression in Serbia between 1989 and 2000, culminating in the student-led OTPOR! movement, is provided in Popović et al. (2007, pp. 174–183). ↑
- “European orientation of citizens of Serbia” research project, by the Serbian Ministry for European Integration, showed that in 2003, 43% of citizens of Serbia would support membership in the EU, while 32% would be against, and 13% would not know what they would choose. (Al Jazeera Balkans, 2023) ↑