Next Generation Myanmar > 39 services, religious activities… it is more difficult with political activities. The parents will likely say no, and their school authority will also say no.’ Parental restrictions were one of the most common reasons given in interviews and discussions for why youth feel unable to influence authorities and their decisions. In part, these restrictions may explain why surveyed youth felt freedom of expression was less protected than it should be. While three out of four youth (78.4 per cent) surveyed agreed that citizens should have a right to free expression and peaceful protest, even when they hold an unpopular view, less (about 70 per cent) agreed that citizens currently have these rights in Myanmar. However, many youth felt restrictions went beyond families and local authorities. Several youth also cited controversial laws, such as Section 66(d) of the Telecommunications Law, as reasons why free expression remains limited in Myanmar. One teenager even shared that he and his peers often self-censor their social media posts to avoid run-ins with such laws, and even possible imprisonment. Notably, youth surveyed in this study did not feel freedom of expression should be absolute. When asked if the state should have the right to censor mass media ‘to ensure civic order and morality’, 67.8 per cent of youth agreed. While a range of content could fall under such censorship, youth expressed most concern with misleading or ‘fake’ news in interviews and group discussions. When asked why only a little more than half (56.6 per cent) of survey respondents approved of the media’s activities in their areas, participants in a youth policy workshop said the reason was the problem of ‘false news’ that could lead to ‘religious, ethnic, and political violence’, They added: ‘If we can get rid of these false news, we will be able to bring development. We can also reduce the conflict in the country. The government should monitor the media so as to share only real news.’ While this view was common among interview participants, some suggested it was a symptom of a larger problem. These youth suggested that many in Myanmar, civilians and officials alike, have little understanding of what ‘democracy’ really means. They explained that due to Myanmar’s poor education system and the widespread fear of anything political, few youth adequately understood government institutions, their obligations or their rights as citizens. According to youth interviewed, this often leads to conflations of democracy with prosperity, absolute freedom or even simply the ‘end of all suffering’. A male charity worker in Yangon offered the example: ‘When a motorcycle [rider] was arrested for not wearing [a] helmet, he would answer that it is his right not to wear the helmet as we are in a democracy.’ This limited understanding of democracy may explain why many youth surveyed in this study answered that they ‘did not know’ when asked questions about political norms or government institutions. When asked about freedoms of expression, government censorship, political opposition and youth influence beyond elections, roughly a quarter of youth on average said they did not know. When asked about their approval of government bodies, an average of 22.1 per cent of youth said they did not know about the actions of a given institution. Nearly seven in ten survey respondents (69.3 per cent) agreed with the statement: ‘Sometimes politics is too complicated and people like me can hardly make sense of what is happening.’ In interviews and discussions, many youth implied that improved education would address misunderstandings about democracy, and therefore improve the practice of democracy in Myanmar. They suggested that an education system that promoted critical thinking would prepare youth for democratic activity and promote co-operation between religious and ethnic groups. One 22-year-old from Pathein exclaimed: ‘Democracy? We need to change the education system first! The exam is about getting 40/100 so as to pass. So the knowledge of the student is very limited. And there is the problem of rote memorisation. We need an education system that allow people to think and analyse the situation.’ While improved education may be warranted, protecting the rights and civil liberties of citizens may only be of secondary importance to youth. Among those surveyed, 69.4 per cent agreed that security and welfare are more important than freedom. This suggests that reaching a peace agreement and ending Myanmar’s ongoing civil war may be slightly more important to Myanmar youth than the political freedoms it may bring. As one 25-year-old lawyer in Taunggyi put it, ‘overall, I just want a peaceful Union where everyone can finally thrive’,