Rise of the left
Left-wing ideologues have found receptive ears in Latin America over the years—most famously with Fidel Castro, a Marxist and nationalist who led Cuba for 50 years from 1959, surviving several CIA assassination attempts. In Chile, Salvador Allende's victory in 1970 and that of Nicaragua's Sandinistas in 1979 were left-wing victories, with Allende beginning the nationalisation of several big industries before a CIA-inspired coup led to his death in 1973.
In the late 1990s, Latin left-wingers were again able to convincingly blame neoliberalism for countries' rampant unemployment, inflation, and impoverishment. The message landed well, especially in Venezuela, a country burdened by debt. It soon spread throughout the region, and the left began sweeping elections. Hugo Chávez was elected president of Venezuela in 1999, serving until his death in 2013, during which time he won four elections. He used money from oil sales to fund public services to improve economic, cultural, and social conditions.
In 2003, he was joined by metalworker and trade unionist Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (aka 'Lula'), who won the presidency in Brazil with his Workers' Party. Lula (who was re-elected as Brazil's president last year) governed for eight years in his first term, fighting child hunger, increasing affordable housing, investing in water purification, and tackling poor construction in the favelas.
In Paraguay, the country's 61-year rule by the Colorado Party ended in 2008 when Fernando Lugo, a left-leaning Catholic bishop, was elected president after backing peasant claims for better land distribution. Likewise, trade union organiser Evo Morales was elected president of Bolivia in 2006 and served until 2019, introducing legal protections for indigenous people and forcing big oil and gas companies to pay more tax on their profits. Also, in 2006, Manuel Zelaya won the Honduran presidency. A centrist who shifted to the left, he introduced free school education and meals, gave subsidies to small farmers, reduced bank interest rates, and established a national minimum wage.
Change as a constant
With neoliberalism being blamed for a range of social problems, the emergence of several socialist governments in the United States' backyard was a White House headache, with China now one of Latin America's primary economic partners. Rising commodity prices had created a surplus that was being utilised to redistribute wealth, further supporting this shift. Meanwhile, the policies of traditionally centrist Latin American parties were not that much different.
Times change, though. In the 21st century, commodity prices fell as the US began looking inwards, and left-wing governments struggled to implement their promises. Zelaya was overthrown and exiled by the military in 2009. Lugo was toppled in 2012. Lula's successor, Dilma Rousseff, was kicked out in 2016, and Morales was forced to flee Bolivia in 2019 after a coup in which his life was threatened.
Yet change also provides opportunities. After 15 years, Zelaya's wife Xiomara was elected president of Honduras; Lula is once again the president of Brazil; and Morales is back in Bolivia, looking to run for president next year.
In addition to Lula, left-wingers have been elected in recent years, including López Obrador in Mexico in 2018, Gustavo Petro in Colombia in 2022, and Gabriel Boric in 2022, so the Latin left is far from dead. However, the continent's nationalists and far-right populists seem to be having a moment. They also have the momentum, which will only be reinforced if Donald Trump retakes the White House in November.
Radicals take hold
Troubles encountered by left-wing governments have opened the way for a resurgent and radical right, whose adherents thrive on polarisation. Their success has seen power change hands in several states across the political spectrum. In Brazil, the retired military officer and Trump fan Jair Bolsonaro easily won the presidency in 2018. An opponent of same-sex marriage, abortion, environmental regulation, and secularism, he lionises Brazil's military dictatorship from 1964-85 and supports the privatisation of state-owned companies.
In El Salvador, Nayib Bukele—originally a leftist—broke a period of polarisation, won the presidency in 2019 by promising a crackdown on gangs, and shifted to the hard right. In common with Trump, Orban, and others, he is staunchly anti-abortion and pro-Israel, criticising the "fake news" media, legislating against "foreign interference", calling for the death of globalisation, and criticising liberal donors like George Soros. After the jailing of tens of thousands and a constitutional amendment to remove presidential term limits, he was re-elected and now refers to himself half-jokingly as El Salvador's "dictator".
In November 2023, political outlier Javier Milei won by a large margin in Argentina, again ending decades of rule by two established Argentine parties. An economist, university lecturer, author, TV personality, DJ, and self-described "anarcho-capitalist", he plays by the same far-right populist playbook, criticising a shadowy "elite" and "useless, parasitic" politicians who he describes as "rats".
Another opponent of abortion and ardent fan of Israel, Milei believes in free markets and deregulation. Since taking office, he has managed to bring Argentina's sky-high inflation rate down, but poverty rates have shot up at the same time. Honing his image as an outsider, Milei is a prime example of the new brand of populist candidate being elected to the highest public office without the backing of a large, established party, marking a sharp break from the past.
Global vs local
To some, Donald Trump's surprise ascent to the US presidency in 2016 paved the way for the likes of Bolsonaro in 2018. For others, the situation in Brazil was the more decisive factor, with Lula (whose first term ended in 2010) having been arrested and barred from running again.
Commentators are divided over the origins of the current far-right wave in Latin America, but many think Trump simply lit a fuse, riding the anger of millions whose jobs and lives were affected years by globalisation and the 2008-09 financial crisis. Playing on voters' fears, he derided immigrants as the source of many problems and promised to "drain the political swamp" while defending white nationalists, cutting taxes for the richest, and telling Americans to put 'America First'.
Guilherme Casarões, a political analyst and professor at the School of Business Administration in Sao Paulo, says Trump and his disciples win votes by blaming others. "What they have in common is the ability to recruit the impoverished middle classes... by looking for who is responsible for their situation."
And while the former Soviet Union once backed communist parties around the world, the 'local nationalism' current has no international backer or advocate. Instead, supporters have gradually formed their own networks. The Atlas Network, founded in 1981, provides common frameworks for radical ideologues and hardliners via intellectual forums, including more than 100 in Latin America.
The right-wing Christian Forum of Spanish-speaking countries, created in 2000, is a response to a similar left-wing variant, while Vox, Spain's far-right party, has set up the Foro de Madrid, a network of like-minded politicians in Latin America. In addition, there is the local affiliate of the Movement. Coordinated by former Trump adviser Steve Bannon, this seeks to organise conservatives around the world. Bannon appointed Bolsonaro's son Eduardo to the group after his father's win.
Pillars of the right
How is the new breed defined? Italian scholar Giancarlo Summa lists six 'pillars,' or underlying characteristics, on which the new far-right phenomenon is based. The first is a rejection of the politics of personal rights, which it labels "cultural Marxism". This can include issues like social inequality, the size of the state, taxation, climate change, gender discrimination, abortion rights, and education. The only rights it reveres are the right to own property and the right to bear arms.
Other pillars include the backing of majority ethnic groups, heralding traditional values and glorifying the past, relying on charismatic leadership, and holding in contempt collectivism, centrism, and trade unionism, which it considers criminal. Additionally, Summa says there is an acceptance of symbolic state violence and, if necessary, actual physical force. Finally, there is a propensity to polarise, to divide between 'us' and 'them', categorising people as either friends or enemies.