Looking back at previous elections, we can distinguish between the fake non-populists, who did not want any change in the status quo, and the real populists who were open to shaking up the system. The non-populists worked as hard as possible to squash the uprising, namely by ironically dismissing it at first, and then by pretending to agree with it while really trying to redirect its energy towards another outlet, and then if that didn't work they outright banned it and shut it down. This is true on the left, where a whole group of posers like Liz Warren and AOC have embraced Bernie's rhetoric, while shutting their mouths on socialism and anti-elitism, as well as the right, where a whole other group of posers like J.D Vance and Vivek have embraced Trump's rhetoric, while shutting their mouths on nationalism and anti-globalism.
One way to spot the fake non-populist right-wingers is to look at the narratives they post about immigration. The typical right-wing slop focuses entirely on the immigrants themselves, never at the source of immigration, sometimes going even as far as to claim that it's a kind of foreign invasion, hostile takeover, and so on. This is not because they haven't checked the facts or have the wrong ideas, although they are wrong, but mainly because right-wingers are complicit and tacitly in favor (though outwardly critical) of mass migration. They simply benefit far too much from cheap labor to ever shut it down, which is why all their non-solutions don't affect the problem.
Immigration is driven by the elites, and throwing open the borders is an elitist policy-- it exclusively benefits them. This is why the nations with the highest percentage of foreign-born people are super wealthy and influential ones-- Saudi Arabia, then the United States, and then the other Western countries (rich but not as rich as Americans and Arabians).
Even within nations, immigrants tend to be concentrated within the wealthiest cities and urban areas, not all around, which again is a reflection of who benefits from it and is driving in it. In America they are predominantly concentrated in the huge coastal cities, as that's where most of the elite lives. They're absent from the Midwest, Pacific Northwest, and New England. Not surprisingly, these areas are also typically derided as boring, stuffy, backwards, etc (non-elite).
These coastal mega-cities are no longer American, basically, they're either un-American or anti-American. They've been turned into playgrounds where a small group of white managers and elites do the least amount of work possible, while a super-massive group of foreigners takes care of all their needs-- driving them around, cleaning up after them, making and delivering their meals, doing all sorts of manual labor for cheap, working outrageous hours, and so on. They've figured out how to min-maxx every aspect of their lives so they can do the least amount of work possible, while making the most amount of money.
All of this destroys the white working class in these cities, who find themselves competing over jobs and housing with people who will work for nothing and share a room with six other people. Mass immigration has been a disaster for working class Americans, as all their expenses have shot up (greater demand) while their wages have stagnated or fallen. This dynamic takes shape regardless of where the immigrants come from (Central America, Muslim world, East Asia, etc), contrary to the endless focus on race and genes, and has even taken place before (the Gilded Age), contrary to the belief that this a never-before-seen entry of foreign armies into the West. Immigration is fundamentally anti-working class, anti-populist, and always has been.
This is what's fueled the rise of dystopian shitholes were large slums right out of the 3rd world co-exist with ultra-wealthy and exclusive enclaves. They are perfectly compatible with each other.
Now as to the future:
As things stand, I don't see either party doing anything about the problem in the short term, aside from cheap branding, lip service, and memes (which are just that). Democrats are the party of big cities, the bigger the better, so they have no problem with immigration and are actively encouraging it. Republicans represent more rural / conservative voters, so they can inject some nationalist or pro-white rhetoric, but they will always cuck on the issue because they also depend on huge armies of cheap labor.
For Republicans and right-wingers, profit margins are more important than the health of the nation. This is especially true since economic growth, upward mobility, and business in general has broken down since the 2008 financial crisis. Mega-corporations, big institutions, and elites received trillions in free money so they could stay afloat (Quantitative Easing), but small businesses, retail, and mega-farms / agriculture weren't so lucky and don't get endless government funding, which is why they are desperate for cheap laborers in order to keep making tons of money / boosting their profit margins, year after year.
This betrayal of the American working class is rationalized as elitism, a major plank of both parties, and a form of contempt for the masses. Sucks to be a low IQ, mouth-breathing, Walmart shopper. Unfortunately you are obsolete, and have to be replaced.
The only national politician that provides some outlet for anti-immigration sentiment currently is Bernie Sanders, but he's too old to really be effective anymore (and even when he was he sadly cucked by the Dems twice, didn't even make it to the general).
However, the whole American system is now breaking down in a disastrous, apocalyptic, fashion. The economy is falling apart, the credibility of the government has been destroyed, and general faith and trust and compliance within the system have all gone out the window. No amount of insults and scolding by the elites will fix those things, as they're the result of fundamental and systemic issues. The shrinkflation and price gouging and collapsing trust and all the other negative symptoms are only going to get worse, compounding on each other to create new problems.
This means the popular and anti-elite feelings are not going to away and be looked back as 'just a phase', before we return to the sensible neoliberal policies that have led us to the current disaster. This is sheer delusion on the part of the establishment. On the contrary, they will only intensify as the system breaks down and people become more desperate.
I think what will become more and more lame and out of fashion is tedious political infighting between sub-factions on the left and the right. This is one of the main reasons for the failure of populist challenges to the establishment: the 'anyone but the other side' syndrome. The whole idea that if we vote for Obama, we will be getting black nationalist communism (in reality, big bank bailouts with woke branding / lip-service). Or that if we vote for Trump, we'll be cursed with white nationalist isolationism (in reality neocon globalism, with nationalist branding for memes and lols on Twitter).
Maybe this will be because the fueled-by-anger woketards (and their right-wing equivalents) literally collapse from an overdose, or maybe they will realize how insane they've become and feel ashamed. They're also going to become a lot poorer, and then a lot poorer, and then poorer still, so their elitist political beliefs will also become more and more costly over time. Either way, I don't think they'll last, and I think a lot of their audiences will simply defect from them and abandon dead-end arguing over dead-end issues.
To end on a positive note, there are too many things out of whack with the current system, across way too many areas, for it to keep going for much longer. So while I do expect things to get worse in the short term, and perhaps even much worse, the audience for an anti-globalist, anti-elitist, populist candidate is only going to grow. And hopefully that will mean real world outcomes and substance over meme branding and bickering on social media.
