Trump's victory back in 2016 marked the beginning of a new era in global politics. Trump, like his Israeli counterpart Netanyahu, won not because of effective solutions he offered on economic and security issues, but because he presented an alternative to the establishment. He was chosen not because people cared about him – he was chosen because he disrupted the rules of the game.
"Deep State"; an alternative that doesn't provide solutions but offers rebellion.
The explanation for the phenomenon can be traced back to the second decade of the 21st century, when the "Deep State" theory emerged, a belief in a "shadow government" operating beneath the surface, attempting to promote a public order according to its own goals.
Supporters of the theory believe that there is a corrupt system, a secret group composed of hidden networks, entities that join forces and act against the interests of the public; in cultural institutions, in Congress, in the media, and in the judicial system.
Trump's great popularity despite the indictments and his narcissistic and vulgar personality only proves this. The tycoon managed to brand himself as the people's leader in his struggle against the "establishment," and as part of this strategy, he labelled his then-rival with the nickname "Crooked Hillary."
White men from a low socioeconomic status voted for Trump in droves.
The billionaire receives significant support among white men from the lower socio-economic class. Those people who were and still are frustrated with the functioning of American democracy, with job losses and the high cost of living, feel that the democratic government is not interested in them and does not work for them; it generously distributes public funds to economic, religious, and ethnic interest groups that work for their re-election.
Similar perceptions resonate in Israel as well. The struggle against the elites looks similar in both cases, with an image of leaders defeating the "well-oiled" system – a system that politicians, the media, and academia often maintain.
Hollywood's stand behind Harris; a misguided campaign
The left in the U.S., like in Israel, struggles to understand the roots of the phenomenon. Harris's latest campaign, which boasted a long line of celebrities, only proved this. The automatic alignment of academia, mainstream media, and the cultural world behind the Democrats created the opposite effect.
People don't examine the "alternative" because it provides solutions, but simply because it offers the "opposite." It's not just a political struggle – it's a cultural war against what is perceived as institutions responsible for managing the state, but not representing the public.
Trumpism like Bibism – a desire to smash the establishment
In other words, between Trumpism and Bibism, there is a broader common ground than we thought. These are people who believe that Trump, like Bibi, represent the desire of the public who felt disconnected from the governing institutions, to stick a finger in their eye. It's not admiration for a leader, but rather a desire to strike at the establishment. The choice of them, the first step towards change – not out of love for the one at the top, but out of hatred for the one standing opposite them.
In fact, the more the elite strengthen and stand behind a certain candidate, the more they reinforce the sense of "not belonging" among the general public. In the U.S., for example, the support of all of Hollywood behind Kamala Harris did not help – on the contrary, it sharpened the feeling that the Democrats represent the elites that the people do not feel part of. In Israel, all the counterattacks on Netanyahu – whether from the media, the judicial system, or the left – not only feed the "Bibi-ism" but also strengthen it and add votes to it.
In other words, the personality of Trump or Netanyahu does not concern their voters; it is a global phenomenon of people who simply want to "screw the establishment" and rebel against the elites, regardless of quality or ability.
