Dear Sir,

What can we learn from the present clash going on globally between the broader electorate and establishment politics, as is clearly typified in the Brexit vote and the American presidential election with Bernie Sanders and Donald Tump, who both pulled non-traditional voters?

The Republican party, which in any event had become stale with a declining constituent base, needed a new and attractive identity makeover to remain relevant, but whoa. Here comes Donald Trump.

That was not what they were looking for, but it is what dissatisfaction spawned. The Donald makes the Tea Party look like cissies and at the same time in Britain, politicians are hoping for a dream political position to neutralise the realities of leaving the European Union.

Trump is the wrecking ball destroying any semblance of the GOP. This is now indeed “Donald’s Party”, but without the coherent philosophy of its predecessor. Many could not agree with all the positions of the Republican Party, but at least they were arguable positions. Trump’s campaign leaves the hard work of thought and policy matters to his opponent, while he perfects name-calling, insults and innuendo.

One of the easiest things to do in this new age with the tide of globalisation is to complain about all the obvious issues of readjustments. The real art of determining what to do to make life better and more equitable for all is the road least travelled. Globalisation brings the possibility of prosperity with its broader marketplace, but increased greed comes along with it, as conglomerates become empires unto themselves and politicians become puppets and tools in their hands.

We have gone way beyond the days of labour and unionism coming to the rescue. It is a bigger issue now of sharing in the benefits brought by technology; not communism but, rather, broadening the base of entrepreneurship and accessing the markets.

Bermuda, too, as a microcosm reflects the same problem, with an old philosophy of labour as a non-solution on one hand and a small group of monopolists who feel entitlement dominating the processes on the other.

Yes, it is time for a new philosophy to take hold. Our humanity is evermore moved by the innate sense of equality, where we cannot all lead, but nonetheless are inalienably entitled. Modernity, inclusiveness and openness must form the base of a new ethical position that will underscore a new age of interaction. The big question is: who can take us there? Shall we ask our present leaders?

KHALID WASI