These are the signs of spring in urban Quebec: green buds on the trees, police choppers in the sky, student protesters in the streets.

The protests are a bit of a nuisance for those of us living in the middle of all the action. It took some creative driving skills a few weeks back to extricate our car as protesters marched past. But from the way many pundits have been talking, you’d think the impact of the protests on local residents had been far more dramatic.

The rhetoric has gotten to the point in the Quebec media of encouraging violence against student protesters. A similarly negative tone (if not quite as dramatic) has been echoed outside Quebec.

When commentary about student protests is reduced to this kind of extreme language, it’s easy to think of the protesting students in the abstract — rather than as the children of the generation now complaining about them.

Sure, it’s annoying to be late to an appointment because of a protest. Certainly, fringe elements among the protesters aren’t always strategic or eloquent in how they choose to express their dissent. But when we dismiss the opinions and concerns of young people so completely, we’re missing the point. It is the job of each new generation of young people to make us uncomfortable — because innovation only happens when we’re pushed beyond our comfort zone.

If young people aren’t pushing us to confront elements of our society that might need questioning, who is? If young people aren’t pushing us to confront elements of our society that might need questioning, who is?

Young people are built to be innovative and to take risks; the research tells us this again and again. And society needs innovation and risk-taking — they’re the drivers of economic and social progress. There is a direct link between how old a population is and how innovative it can be. Societies which are older — like ours — are less innovative, more cautious. We need the impatience of the young more than ever if we want to live in a society that continues to drive economic growth.

Whether you agree with the protesters, protests like the ones in Quebec create the kind of spaces where our young people get to figure out what they believe and test new ideas — which is exactly what we need them to do. If young people aren’t pushing us to confront elements of our society that might need questioning, who is?

Being a young person also means being in the process of “shifting from ‘guidance, support and resources’ to ‘relationships where power is shared, mutual, and reciprocal’”. So protests serve another important purpose — they create space where young people are learning both to be leaders themselves and also to claim space in the public policy debate.

We often bemoan the lack of engagement by young people in Canadian democracy. So it’s heartening to see a province like Quebec bucking the trend — a place where young people are engaging both inside (yes, young people actually vote in Quebec) and outside the system. That’s cause for celebration, not complaint.

This spring, we’ve seen about 55,000 students on 10 university and college campuses take the time to think about what matters to them and try to do something about it. A healthy democracy has no age limit for engagement — nor does it limit the non-violent ways in which its citizens can choose to engage.

It is OK to be uncomfortable with the student protests. That’s what they’re for — to make us uncomfortable. And if we want our democracy to have a bright future, we need to encourage our young people to make us uncomfortable more often.

Ilona Dougherty is co-founder of Apathy is Boring, a national non-partisan charitable organization that uses art and technology to educate youth about democracy and encourages them to vote. She is a regular commentator in national media, a published author, and speaks to audiences internationally about redefining intergenerational relationships and encouraging active citizenship.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by all iPolitics columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of iPolitics.