It’s often difficult to gauge elections ahead of time when looking at the politics of other nations from the outside. For example, if you’re in the Americas, information coming from U.S. news media often conflicts with what is seen in other countries and regions. As is typical, the truth lies somewhere in the middle. However, with national politics, elections often end with big surprises, not unlike in the United States (such as both times President Donald Trump won). Predicting winners and losers from the outside is much more complicated than from within.
Enter Latin America, the subject of much discussion lately.
With U.S. aggression against multiple Latin American countries like Colombia and Venezuela, and forcing others like Trinidad and Tobago to pick a side in what has been referred to as the “Zone of Peace” by 33 Latin American and Caribbean nations since 2014, the U.S. mission to destabilize the region is well underway. But for far-right governments, even those with alleged ties to drug smuggling operations, the U.S. is boosting their economies and working deals.
For El Salvador, it was money to fund President Nayib Bukele’s unsustainable and corrupt prison economy. For others, it was simply agreeing to deals already in place, putting Trump’s name on them, and claiming foreign policy victories. This would presumably help keep Trump’s White House off their backs and their aid deals in place as well. Essentially, they were “Do as we say, or else” kind of deals made clear when the Trump administration sent Secretary of State Marco Rubio to fumble his way through Latin America.
Argentina Elections
For Argentina, to the ire of most in the U.S., support came with Trump offering up to $40 billion to bail out Argentina’s economy. The deal may also include an agreement from the United States to buy Argentine beef. An idea that will put U.S. cattle ranchers in an even tighter market with already shrinking margins, as the U.S. faces dire Argentina-like austerity measures due to a Republican-led shutdown of the government. The similarities between Trump and Milei, along with the bailout, have led to broad anti-Milei sentiment in the U.S. Meanwhile, Argentines went to the polls yesterday and helped boost Milei by electing more lawmakers from his party.
This may come as a surprise to many, but we see the situation completely differently. Yes, the people of Argentina voted to give Milei a chance, despite making Argentina susceptible to U.S. interference for a meager $20 billion. In the U.S., people are likely viewing it through the same lens they view Trump, and for good reason. Milei has led similar attacks on so-called DEI initiatives, “wokeism,” the LGBTQ community, women’s health services, and services for the Indigenous communities across the country. Elon Musk is also a huge fan of Milei’s.
While not an avowed Christian nationalist, Milei’s libertarian views have led him to echo the Christian nationalist movements currently sweeping Europe and Latin America. Like Bukele in El Salvador, Ecuadorian President Daniel Noboa, Venezuelan far-right leader Maria Corina Machado, and former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, who was recently convicted and sentenced to 27 years in prison for an attempted coup, Milei is in the White House’s good graces for a reason: subordination to the United States. That Trump has also mimicked much of what Milei and Bukele have done at home to consolidate power also plays a role.
Many are arguing that Trump’s bailout of Argentina and his threat to not “waste our time” helping the nation if Milei’s party loses helped swing the election in Milei’s favor. Trump essentially admitted as much when he told Milei, “Your poll numbers, I hear, are pretty good. I think they will be better after this,” earlier this month. For many Argentine voters leading up to the election, Trump’s involvement likely played a role in how they voted, especially in an economy that, despite showing occasional signs of hope, regularly continues to falter.
What comes next for Argentina and Milei’s libertarian governance is anyone’s guess. But he now has the power he’s sought, thanks in part to the same type of voter apathy the U.S. saw in 2024. After an election that saw the lowest national voter turnout since 1983, Milei now has a referendum to continue his austerity measures and his mission to privatize everything. Milei’s party, La Libertad Avanza (Freedom Advances), won nearly 41% of the vote, taking 13 of 24 Senate seats (up from 7) and 64 of the 127 lower-house seats (up from 37), making it much easier for him to enact his policies.
Sitting on the sidelines never serves anyone’s best interests.
Bolivia Moving Right
Recent elections in Bolivia signal a rightward shift in the country’s politics following a seemingly growing trend in Latin America. The current presidential election is between two conservative candidates. One is similar to Trump and Milei, the other is more like Bill Clinton. What is considered liberalism, or neoliberalism, in the U.S. is often viewed as conservatism in most other countries, especially in Latin America. Social policies to help impoverished people and marginalized groups, universal healthcare, and many other programs are considered standard.
Bolivia fits the bill with its Single Health System (SUS), which provides free universal coverage for those not covered by social security. It’s set up similarly to Medicare in the United States, with healthcare organized into three models. Level 1: Health centers for primary, non-complex care. Level 2: Hospitals with services for internal medicine, surgery, gynecology, and pediatrics. Level 3: Specialized hospitals for complex treatments, like cancer care and advanced imaging.
Bolivia is also a plurinational state with 36 recognized Indigenous peoples. The national census in 2012 showed that 41% of people over the age of 15 were Indigenous, with some later estimates showing it to be higher at about 48%. The new Constitution, passed in 2007, has provisions relating to the rights of indigenous peoples. Opposition to these policies comes from sectors of society that are fearful of losing their privileges.
Many of these rights came under Bolivia’s first Indigenous president, Evo Morales, and his Movimiento al Socialismo (MAS) party. Morales sought to run for election again but was denied after already sitting as president for two terms, a limit set by Bolivia’s constitution. In response, Morales and many other Indigenous leaders led a boycott of the primaries leading up to the current election. The current president, Luis Arce, also a member of the MAS party, decided not to run as he is deeply unpopular.
Without a viable candidate and the ensuing boycott of the primaries, Bolivia is now left with a choice between two candidates: Rodrigo Paz Pereira, who won 32% of the vote, and Jorge “Tuto” Quiroga, who won 26% of the vote. Interior Minister Eduardo del Castillo, also a MAS party member who ran in place of Arce, received only 3% of the vote.
Over 19% of the ballots cast were null and void.
Now, Bolivians are faced with Quiroga, who wants to implement Trump-Milei-style austerity measures, ending nearly all social programs, or Paz, who is proposing gradual reforms such as tax cuts, tariff reductions, and decentralizing the national government. Quiroga wants to seek international loans before the Bolivian economy recovers, but Paz believes this to be a bad idea. Both want to restore relations with the U.S. after they were severed over the so-called “War on Drugs.”
As Bolivia endures the worst economic crisis in decades, and with fuel in increasingly short supply, the economy is a top issue. Like Argentina, Bolivians are struggling to make ends meet as they are also faced with high inflation, which recently jumped to 23%. After two decades of leftist control in Bolivia, that may be coming to an end soon in a country whose politics are often very divisive. What the future holds for Bolivia is in Bolivians’ hands.
If there is an enduring message in both of these stories, it’s that sitting out elections, whether due to apathy or a boycott, is a losing proposition, especially for marginalized groups.
Analysis/Opinion
The United States under Trump is aligning itself deeply with far-right figures who may not be avowed Christian nationalists, but echo the divisive messaging to destabilize Latin America and install leaders more friendly to U.S. corporate interests. The invocation of the Monroe Doctrine and the Roosevelt Corollary, while using language like “divine providence,” signals a return to a more colonial and imperialist approach to Latin America. This echoes much of the far-right “reconquista” (reconquer) rhetoric heard among far-right groups across Europe.
While Latin America seems to be shifting to the right politically, there are signs that it may not be a lasting one. Leftist movements typically endure due to cohesion and organization, while far-right movements tend to be more fragmented, thus lacking staying power. This time, however, with so many leaders willing to embrace the growth of Christian nationalism, that is, use religion to commit atrocities and later hide behind it, this movement could be tougher to push back.
However, in a region that has been reckoning with its colonized past, its hold may be dubious at best, as in Brazil, when the country voted Bolsonaro out after just one term of his Christian nationalist agenda. With the United States threatening the region’s stability and sovereignty, elections in Latin America may provide insight into how far-right politics are being received and how to best address them.
Elections in Latin America are something to watch for the foreseeable future.
I’m an independent investigative journalist who enjoys digging deeper into the stories you see on the news. Find my work at Unicorn Riot, The Antagonist Magazine, Latino Rebels, and more. I’m also on TikTok, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Mastodon, and Threads. To support my work, consider becoming a paid subscriber or making a donation via Venmo, PayPal, or Cash App.
This is such an educational analysis on politics in Latin America. It started me thinking about the fact there is no loyalty to country in the billionaires who are affecting so much in politics all over the world. If they can just convince people that following their moral code will get them into heaven, they can control people quite easily. You have increased my interest and knowledge in all of this.
Very nice work on this, brother.