The populist threat: How Bukele and Milei undermine democratic progress in Latin America

Central America knows how to set trends. At least in politics. The year 1954 is a clear example, because that is when a coup d’état took place against the president of Guatemala, Jacobo Árbenz, who had stood up to the interests of the powerful Guatemalan oligarchy and American companies, mainly the United Fruit Company. That military mutiny “marked the beginning of an era of legitimization of political violence to eliminate populist leaders,” write María Esperanza Casullo and Harry Brown, authors of El populismo en América Central (Populism in Central America), which analyzes the rise of radical leaders like Nayib Bukele in El Salvador, another political demagogue whose heavy-handed measures to eradicate violence have sparked a wave of admiration across the continent, from Panama to Argentina.

Central America and the Caribbean in no way follow the political trends of their southern (or northern) neighbors, but, on the contrary, often inaugurate them or mark milestones, the authors state in their book. For Casullo, who hails from Argentina, and Brown, who is from Costa Rica, the events taking place in that strip of land that joins the continent together help understand the populist advances in the region and its consequences for democracy. Both authors discussed this global phenomenon through a video call. “Populism is a warning about what has gone wrong in democracy,” warns Brown.

Bukele is in the media spotlight due to his great popularity. The controversial president of El Salvador has won re-election with 85% of the votes and maintains control of Congress and the justice system; despite his heavy-handed policy and authoritarian drift, his project is supported by the vast majority of Salvadorans. Why is the young president so attractive to voters? “Because populism is effective,” replies Casullo, who has a doctorate in government studies from Georgetown University. “It generates enthusiasm and mobilization at this historical moment, when doing normal politics is running into many difficulties because this is a time of great uncertainty and polarization,” she adds. Furthermore, says Casullo, Latin America has problems that governments have not been able to solve, such as inequality, poverty and organized crime, and that is why politicians choose “the populist strategy, because it is effective, it generates political identity, that is, it generates a mobilized and convinced ‘we.’”

Leaders like Bukele or Argentina’s Javier Milei have been able to read this discontent and attract those who feel prisoners of injustice, and in this way create a common enemy at which to direct their discontent, which can be political parties or the traditional elites (the “caste,” as Milei has called it), multinational organizations such as the International Monetary Fund or the World Bank, civil organizations or activist groups such as feminists, the media, or external powers, be it the United States or the European Union. “When this populist myth clicks, very deep identification processes are generated. This allows for action, because very profound reforms can be passed, the Constitution reformed, the criminal policy of a country completely transformed, based on this myth,” says Casullo.

Radical populists

In their book, the researchers define Bukele as a “radical populist,” even though the leader of the small Central American country sells himself as a modern man, an efficient CEO, someone capable of transforming and improving the great company that has been handed to him; a cool and friendly young man who moves the masses through his effective use of social media. His actions, however, imitate the old tricks of Latin American authoritarianism, which include messianic overtones and claiming to be anointed by God. “Bukele became a dissident after coming from within the system; he dared to leave the system and point his finger at it, and I believe that this is an attitude in which a good part of the population can see itself reflected,” warns Harry Brown, who has a doctorate in political science from the Complutense University of Madrid.

“What Bukele did was blame the problems on a political event that for Latin American and Central American democrats is almost sacred, which are the Peace Accords, calling them a pact between the corrupt. One of the findings of the book is that in Central America the enemy that populists point to are precisely those pacts, which they call agreements between elites that do not allow access to new actors who could presumably solve the country’s problems. And Bukele, with his attitude and way of presenting himself, embodies the possibility of a future that Salvadorans had been unable to find,” adds the author.

Costa Rica, considered a solid democracy, has not been spared from this new populist wave. The country elected Rodrigo Chaves, a technocrat who channeled anger toward the elites, as its new president. “The case of Costa Rica draws a lot of attention, because it has been and continues to be one of the most solid democracies in Latin America, and now they have a president with very strong populist traits. The big difference in the Costa Rica case is that the populist myth looks to the past, because it is the only country in Central America, and one of the few in Latin America, that once had a small welfare state. Costa Ricans are really aware that they used to live better, and part of President Chaves’ campaign was focused on the idea of once again being the happiest country in the world,” explains Brown.

In their book, the authors pay attention to an element that is already defining democracy in the region, which is the collapse of traditional party politics. It is seen in El Salvador, with the collapse of ARENA and the disappearance of the leftist FMLN from popularly elected positions, but also in Costa Rica, where the parties have fallen into a deep crisis. “Political parties in Central America have never been very strong, but it is true that the accumulation of demands points directly towards those responsible for the political systems. The paradox of all this is that in order to build new regimes, which is what some populists propose, organization is needed, which is why they do not necessarily wish to put an end to political parties, but often end up organizing them, because they need them to mobilize and unite a population that may not be united through class or ethnicity, as is the case in Bolivia, but needs an institutionalized body to articulate the mobilization of the population,” says Brown.

The populist wave

Populists like Bukele or Milei generate great attraction at the regional level, and their measures generate popularity and are followed by politicians in the region, in what seems to be a new political paradigm in Latin America, from Colombia to Paraguay. “Populism always operates like this, by imitation of repertoires. There is no ideology, there is no Mao Red Book or a populist Fourth International. They are presented as successful examples that are adapted and copied in other contexts,” explains Casullo. “We South Americans don’t look much at Central America, but what we are seeing now in countries like Argentina are very similar processes. For example, in Rosario, which has a very big drug trafficking problem, we have seen photos in a prison in the same style as El Salvador, and I think we are going to continue seeing that at least in the medium term,” she adds.

Can the region’s democracies survive this populist wave? “Yes, totally,” says Casullo. “The best resource for action is strategic patience and betting on political action. These types of governments have internal cracks, they can be successful, so to speak, in reducing poverty or in reducing crime, but it is very costly to maintain this constant antagonism, and society, which at first may feel enthusiastic and mobilized, over time wants to return to having a more or less normal life,” she adds. “There is hope,” says Brown. “This populist moment should serve as a warning of what has been going wrong in democracy and I hope that the elites will take note and become more aware of what needs to be reformed and what needs to be corrected, because the move from populism to authoritarianism It is exceptional, it is not the rule.”

Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get more English-language news coverage from EL PAÍS USA Edition