The public’s politics are clearer than they appear; candidates, listen up

2016 may be the beginning of the next era in our history books.

Trump. Brexit. Le Pen. Duterte. The list goes on. It has undoubtedly been a year of the unthinkable — at least to some.

Of course, that “some” is the traditional political architecture of the establishment—forefront politicians and parties, social elite, journalists, pundits, and media agencies generally entertaining various takes on the status quo — standing upon a base of all nonconforming others: many in academia, “alternative media”, renegade politicians and third parties, ever unsatisfied activists, extremists, and the I-think-about-politics-once-every-four-years mortals.

That second category has always had its respective concerns — legitimate and not — and has sought attention and action from the establishment. For the most vocal and resonant movements, diluted versions of their ideas may have headlined a bill or been discussed in a short interview; for the rest, an “I’ll see what I can do” sufficed.

“Not anymore.”

So say the hundreds of millions around the world who feel, justly, that they have been ignored and even manipulated by global elites. In the eyes of many, today’s bourgeoisie have only maintained formal democratic structures to give the impression of “rule by the people”, directing politics and circumventing democracy with their wealth, “expert” analysis, and office. “Britain would never leave the EU,” they say. “It just doesn’t benefit them in any arguable way.”

Ten years ago, most would have let that bipartisan opinion deter them from voting leave. This week, it was encouragement in itself. Last year, no one could have imagined Donald Trump taking the Republican presidential nomination; he now faces off with an idol of the establishment who herself was nearly unable to shake a 74-year old socialist. The public is fed up with the lack of respect from political powers, and no longer desires a simple “restart” at the end of every ruling period.

Establishment figures have often correctly pointed out racist, xenophobic, and fascist sentiments within these anti-establishment campaigns, but, whether out of negligence or convenience, have then dismissed them entirely. Regardless of how far astray many have tread, every single one of these movements is driven in large part by real, respectable grievances. Every single one. Whether working classes stripped of their jobs by poorly managed globalization or cities seeing a lapse of representation and public services, they all have been taken advantage of by financial elites and vastly underestimated by the political.

Though this wave of often illogical populism scares most of us today, at its heart is a sharp reminder to the establishment of where the power truly lies. Trump has not so much won over his supporters with his policy as he has with his being lambasted in the media and in Washington. Most Trump supporters likely do not believe he will actually improve their economic statuses or defeat ISIL singlehandedly — they simply want to turn the tables, and Trump is the terrible yet effective outlet offered to them at this time. Logical retorts and fact-checking by Democrats, Republicans, scholars, and journalists seem to bounce off these rogue pseudo-conservatives solely because their goal is not currently good politics, but one which recognizes their frustration.

What otherwise dichotic Bernie Sanders and Trump supporters have pleaded for in tandem is a government that works with and for “the people”, in which the norm is not the career politician funded by conditional corporate money but an “outsider” acting independent of obviously nondemocratic practices. Though world politics seem to be moving away from democracy in countless cases, 2016 may be a necessarily indirect step towards a more democratic world.