Research Article

DOI :10.26650/JECS2021-978819   IUP :10.26650/JECS2021-978819    Full Text (PDF)

The Millennial Generational Style: New Global Political and Economic Orientations

Neslihan K. Çevik

In this paper, using Mannheim, I identify Millennials (covering both Gen Y and Gen Z) as a global generation that has spawned a new generational style. I provide a brief overview of the historical conditions that have shaped Millennials’ life experiences. In a nutshell, Millennials have come of age in a new world marked by an ongoing shift in actorhood from macro structures to micro agents. I argue that this formative experience has impelled at least three meaningful norms that distinguish Millennials’ generational style: self-reliance, quotidianism and regeneration. I then trace manifestations of these norms in politics and the economy. I suggest that in politics, the push for self-reliance takes the form of a self-responsible citizen, quotidianism is manifested through a shift towards politics of the ordinary, and regeneration is embodied in Do-it-Yourself (DIY) politics. In economics , on the other hand, the self-reliant actorhood is reflected through the new occupational profile of the ‘maker’, quotidianism is expressed through non-traditional types of work monetizing individuality and personality, and finally regeneration takes the form of critical making. I conclude with implications for social theory on youth and change. The paper attempts to move beyond the dichotomous view of youth either as threats or as heroic figures and propose a broader conceptualization of young adult’s agency to capture how ordinary youth create new centers of configuration in society, from new citizenship norms to new market patterns.

PDF View


  • Aboim, S., & Vasconcelos, P. (2014). From political to social generations: A critical reappraisal of Mannheim’s classical approach. European Journal of Social Theory, 17(2), 165-183. google scholar
  • Andretta, M., & della Porta, D. (2020). When millennials protest. Italian Youth in international context: Belonging, constraints and opportunities. Routledge. google scholar
  • Audretsch, D. B., & Thurik, A. R. (2004). A model of the entrepreneurial economy. International Journal of Entrepreneurship Education 2(2): 143—166. google scholar
  • Bang, H. P., & Eva, S. (1999). The everyday maker: A new challenge to democratic governance. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 21(3), 325—341. google scholar
  • Bang, H. P., (2005) Everyday Makers and Expert Citizens: Active Participants in the Search for a New Governance, In J. Newman (Ed.), Remaking Governance: Peoples, Politics and the Public Sphere (pp. 159—179). Policy Press. google scholar
  • Bauman, Z. (2001). Individually Together. In (Ed.) U. Beck, & E. Beck-Germshein, Individualization: institutionalized individualism and its social and political consequences. (pp xiv—xx). Sage. google scholar
  • Beck, U. (2008). Global generations in world risk society. Revista CIDOB d’Afers Internacionals, 203-216. google scholar
  • Beck, U., & Beck-Gernsheim, E. (2009). Global generations and the trap of methodological nationalism for a cosmopolitan turn in the sociology of youth and generation. European sociological review, 25(1), 25—36. google scholar
  • Bennett, W. L. (2012). The personalization of politics: Political identity, social media, and changing patterns of participation. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 644(1), 20—39. google scholar
  • Bourdieu, P. 1984. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. google scholar
  • Bourdieu, P. 1993. “Youth’ Is Just a Word.” In P. Bourdieu (Ed.), Sociology in Question. (pp 94—102). London, UK: Sage. google scholar
  • Buckner, E., Beges, S., & Khatib, L. (2012). Social Entrepreneurship: Why is it important Post Arab Spring? Online Survey Report. Stan ford University. Retrieved from White_Paper_Social_Entrepreneurship.pdf google scholar
  • Cavatorta, F. (2012). Arab Spring: the awakening of civil society: a general overview: 75-81. European Institute of the Mediterranean Yearbook (pp. 75—81). Barcelona, Spain: IEMed Press. google scholar
  • Cavatorta, F. (2012) ‘Arab Spring: The Awakening of Civil Society: A General Overview’, google scholar
  • Challand, B. (2011). The Counter-Power of Civil Society and the Emergence of a New Political Imaginary in the Arab World. Constellations, 18(3), 271—283. google scholar
  • Collin, P. (2015). Young citizens and political participation in a digital society: addressing the democratic disconnect. Springer. google scholar
  • Constine, J. (2020) SignalFire’s creator economy market map. [Blog post] Signal Fire. Retrieved from google scholar
  • Cain, L. D. (1964). Life Course and Social Structure In (Ed.) R. E. L. Faris, Handbook of Modern Sociology. (pp 272—309). Chicago: Rand McNally. google scholar
  • Castells, M. (1996). The Rise of the Network Society, Volume I of The information age: economy, society and culture. Oxford: Blackwell google scholar
  • Comaroff, J., & Comaroff, J. (2006). Reflections on youth, from the past to the postcolony. In M.S. Fisher, G. google scholar
  • Downey (Eds.), Frontiers of capital: Ethnographic reflections on the new economy (pp. 267—81). Duke University Press google scholar
  • Cicchelli, V., & Octobre, S. (2018) Aesthetico-Cultural Cosmopolitanism and French Youth: The Taste of the World, London: Palgrave. google scholar
  • Davidson, A. (2020). The Passion Economy: The New Rules for Thriving in the Twenty-first Century. Vintage. google scholar
  • Davies, S. R. (2017). Hackerspaces: making the maker movement. John Wiley & Sons. google scholar
  • della Porta, D. (2019) “Deconstructing generations in movements: Introduction. American Behavioral Scientist. 63(10), 1407-1426. google scholar
  • De Stefano, V. (2015). The rise of the just-in-time workforce: On-demand work, crowd work, and labor protection in the gig-economy. Comparative Labor Law and Policy Journal, 37 (3), 471-503. google scholar
  • Edmunds, J., & Turner, B. S. (2005). Global generations: social change in the twentieth century. The British Journal of Sociology, 56(4), 559-577. google scholar
  • Elder, G. H. (1974). Children of the great depression. Routledge. google scholar
  • Eisenstadt, S.N. (1956) From generation to generation. New York: The Free Press. google scholar
  • Frank, D. J., & Meyer, J. W. (2002). The profusion of individual roles and identities in the postwar period. Sociological Theory, 20(1), 86-105. google scholar
  • Fatemi, F. (2021, January 20) The Rise of substack—And what’s behind It. Forbes. Retrieved from https://www. google scholar
  • Furlong, A., Cartmel, F., & Biggart, A. (2006). Choice biographies and transitional linearity: re-conceptualizing modern youth transitions. Papers: Revista de sociologia, 79, 225-239. google scholar
  • Gauntlett, D. (2013). Making is Connecting. John Wiley & Sons. google scholar
  • Gerhardt, M. (2020) Coronavirus quarantine? Gen X was made for this. Boomers and Gen Z, not so much. NBC news Retrieved from google scholar
  • Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity: Self and society in the late modern age. Stanford University Press. google scholar
  • Gilleard, C., & Higgs, P. (2005). Contexts of ageing: Class, cohort and community. Polity. google scholar
  • Hanafi, S. (2012). The Arab revolutions; the emergence of a new political subjectivity. Contemporary Arab Affairs, 5(2), 198—213. google scholar
  • Harris, A., & Roose, J. (2014). DIY citizenship amongst young Muslims: Experiences of the ‘ordinary’. Journal of Youth Studies, 17(6), 794—813. google scholar
  • Jin, L. (2019, October 8). The Passion Economy and the Future of Work. [Blog post] Andreessen Horowitz. Retrieved from google scholar
  • Kalleberg, A. (2011). Good Jobs, Bad Jobs. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. google scholar
  • Lash, S (2001). Individualization in a Non-Linear Mode. In (Eds.) U. Beck, & E. Beck-Germshein, Individualization: institutionalized individualism and its social and political consequences. (pp. vii—xiv). Sage. google scholar
  • Mannheim, K (1952). “The Problem of Generations”. In P., Kecskemeti (Ed.). Essays on the sociology of knowledge: Collected works (Vol. 5). (pp. 276-322). New York: Routledge. google scholar
  • Masquelier, A., & Soares, B. F. (Eds.). (2016). Muslim youth and the 9/11 generation. University of New Mexico Press. google scholar
  • Manyika, J., Lund, S., Bughin, J., Robinson, K., Mischke, J., & Mahajan, D. (2016). Independent-Work-Choice-necessity-and-the-gig-economy. McKinsey Global Institute. Retrieved from featured%20insights/employment%20and%20growth/independent%20work%20choice%20necessity%20and%20 the%20gig%20economy/independent-work-choice-necessity-and-the-gig-economy-executive-summary.pdf google scholar
  • Milkman, R. (2017). A new political generation: Millennials and the post-2008 wave of protest. American Sociological Review, 82(1), 1-31. google scholar
  • McKay, G. (Ed.). (1998). DIY culture: Party & protest in nineties Britain. Verso. google scholar
  • Momani, B. (2017). Entrepreneurship: An Engine for Job Creation and Inclusive Growth in the Arab World. google scholar
  • Brookings Doha Center. Retrieved from entrepreneurship_in_the_arab_world.pdf google scholar
  • Morgan, G., & Nelligan, P. (2018). The creativity hoax: Precarious work in the gig economy. Anthem Press. google scholar
  • Musgrove, F. (1964) Youth and the social order, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. google scholar
  • Micheletti, M. (2002, August). Individualized collective action. Paper for the Nordic Political Science Association’s google scholar
  • Meeting, Aalborg, Denmark (pp. 14-17). Retrieved from download?doi= google scholar
  • Parker, K., Graf, N., & Igielnik, R. (2019). Generation Z looks a lot like Millennials on key social and political issues. Pew Research Center, 17. Retrieved from generation-z-looks-a-lot-like-millennials-on-key-social-and-political-issues/ google scholar
  • BNP Paribas (2015). 2016 Bnp PariBas global entrepreneur report: The emergence of the ‘Millennipreneur’. Retrieved from google scholar
  • Parsons, T. (1942) ‘Age and sex in the context of the United States’, American SociologicalReview, 7: 604-16. google scholar
  • Pickard, S. (2019). Politics, Protest and Young People. Springer. google scholar
  • Pilcher, J. (1994). Mannheim’s sociology of generations: an undervalued legacy. British Journal of Sociology, 45 (3): 481—495. google scholar
  • Philipps, J. (2018). A global generation? Youth studies in a postcolonial world. Societies, 8(1), 14. google scholar
  • Ratto, M. (2011). Critical making: Conceptual and material studies in technology and social life. The information society. 27(4), 252—260. google scholar
  • Ratto, M., & Boler, M. (2014). Introduction. In M. Ratto & M. Boler (Eds.). DIY citizenship: Critical making and social media (pp. 1—22). MIT Press. google scholar
  • Rosenau, J. N. (2003). Distant proximities: Dynamics beyond globalization. Princeton University Press. google scholar
  • Rosenau, J. N. (2017). Globalization and governance: bleak prospects for sustainability. In Pfaller, A., & M. Lerch (Eds.). Challenges of globalization: New trends in international politics and society (pp. 201-216). Routledge. google scholar
  • Sander, T. H., & Putnam, R. D. (2010). Democracy’s past and future: still bowling alone? The Post-9/11 Split. Journal of Democracy, 21(1), 9—16. google scholar
  • Tiidenberg, K., & Allaste, A. A. (2016). Perceptions of participation and the share button. Studies of Transition States and Societies, 8(2), 52—63 google scholar
  • Thorpe, C., & Inglis, D. (2019). Do ‘global generations’ exist? : From Mannheim to Beck and beyond. Youth and Globalization, 1(1), 40—64. google scholar
  • Tomlinson, J. (2007). The culture of speed: The coming of immediacy. Sage. google scholar
  • Oettler, A., & Schwarz, C. (2017). Political temporalities of youth. Middle East - Topics & Arguments. 9. 5-14. google scholar
  • Wehr, K. (2013). DIY: The Search for Control and Self-reliance in the 21st Century. Routledge. google scholar
  • Woodman, D., & Wyn, J. (2015) Youth and generation: Rethinking continuity and change in the lives of young people, London: Sage. google scholar
  • Young, I. M. (1994) Gender as seriality: Thinking about women as a social collective, Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 19: 713-38. google scholar
  • Zachara-Szymanska, M. (2021). A Postcapitalistic people? Examining the Millennial generation’s economic philosophies and practices. Sustainability, 13(7), 3784. google scholar
  • Zukin, C., Keeter, S., Andolina, M., Jenkins, K., & Delli Carpini, M. X. (2006). A new engagement? Political participation, civic life, and the changing American citizen. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. google scholar


Copy and paste a formatted citation or use one of the options to export in your chosen format



Çevik, N.K. (2022). The Millennial Generational Style: New Global Political and Economic Orientations. Journal of Economy Culture and Society, 0(65), 29-46.


Çevik N K. The Millennial Generational Style: New Global Political and Economic Orientations. Journal of Economy Culture and Society. 2022;0(65):29-46.


Çevik, N.K. The Millennial Generational Style: New Global Political and Economic Orientations. Journal of Economy Culture and Society, [Publisher Location], v. 0, n. 65, p. 29-46, 2022.

Chicago: Author-Date Style

Çevik, Neslihan K.,. 2022. “The Millennial Generational Style: New Global Political and Economic Orientations.” Journal of Economy Culture and Society 0, no. 65: 29-46.

Chicago: Humanities Style

Çevik, Neslihan K.,. The Millennial Generational Style: New Global Political and Economic Orientations.” Journal of Economy Culture and Society 0, no. 65 (Jul. 2024): 29-46.

Harvard: Australian Style

Çevik, NK 2022, 'The Millennial Generational Style: New Global Political and Economic Orientations', Journal of Economy Culture and Society, vol. 0, no. 65, pp. 29-46, viewed 20 Jul. 2024,

Harvard: Author-Date Style

Çevik, N.K. (2022) ‘The Millennial Generational Style: New Global Political and Economic Orientations’, Journal of Economy Culture and Society, 0(65), pp. 29-46. (20 Jul. 2024).


Çevik, Neslihan K.,. The Millennial Generational Style: New Global Political and Economic Orientations.” Journal of Economy Culture and Society, vol. 0, no. 65, 2022, pp. 29-46. [Database Container],


Çevik NK. The Millennial Generational Style: New Global Political and Economic Orientations. Journal of Economy Culture and Society [Internet]. 20 Jul. 2024 [cited 20 Jul. 2024];0(65):29-46. Available from: doi: 10.26650/JECS2021-978819


Çevik, NeslihanK.. The Millennial Generational Style: New Global Political and Economic Orientations”. Journal of Economy Culture and Society 0/65 (Jul. 2024): 29-46.


Published Online26.01.2022


Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC)

This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work non-commercially, and although their new works must also acknowledge you and be non-commercial, they don’t have to license their derivative works on the same terms.


Istanbul University Press aims to contribute to the dissemination of ever growing scientific knowledge through publication of high quality scientific journals and books in accordance with the international publishing standards and ethics. Istanbul University Press follows an open access, non-commercial, scholarly publishing.