The new order that began to be enshrined on January 20 with President Trump’s inaugural speech and his frenzied issuance of executive orders in the following days represents a historic global shift. The impact of these developments is worldwide, and Latin America is no exception. This transformation, whose most emblematic moment was that date, had been in the making for some time, manifesting through various forms of democracy fatigue in weary societies amid the rampant rise of anarcho-capitalism.
On one hand, the United States’ emblematic nature and its demonstrative effect on the region stem from a century and a half of relations that soon took on a vertical, dependent, and nearly exclusive dynamic, eventually culminating in an abandoned imperial model. Successive stages such as “America for the Americans,” “Big Stick,” “Manifest Destiny,” “Good Neighbor Policy,” and “Alliance for Progress” left a profound mark, shaping much of Latin America’s domestic politics. Now, these historical legacies are being redefined by Trump’s “Make America Great Again” (MAGA) doctrine.
On the other hand, the immediacy and widespread reach of the digital revolution have reshaped global interactions. The unrestricted and exponential development of digital technology has fostered a hyper-communicative environment where diverse content reaches the most remote corners of the hemisphere at breakneck speed. Simultaneously, it has triggered a seismic shift in the world economy with the emergence of a sophisticated techno-financial-industrial complex.
Among the numerous areas affected by this newly inaugurated order—leaving aside country-specific implications—three political dimensions stand out. These three interconnected levels span from the strictly individual to the normative, encompassing the innovative policy choices being implemented across various domains.
Driven largely by presidentialism, most political power structures in the Americas are increasingly centered around isolated individuals, sidelining the once-central role of political parties. This constitutes the first level: an excessive focus on individuals’ personal behavior, blending subjective rule with particular psychological traits. The current moment appears to be redefining the boundaries of rationality, enabling each person to construct reality as they see fit, elevating egotism to unprecedented levels, fostering deception, and legitimizing erratic behaviors that were once unacceptable.
A striking example of this phenomenon is Argentine President Javier Milei’s response to a cryptocurrency scandal that resulted in allegations of fraud and criminal charges. Milei claimed, “I did not promote it; I merely shared it.” His apparent naïveté underscores the contemporary social landscape, where relentless individualism and commodified vanity have eroded trust, solidarity, and justice. In such an environment, leaders thrive on perpetual boasting, absolute self-confidence, and unrestrained speech.
This dynamic was on full display during Trump’s February 4 press conference with Netanyahu when he nonchalantly suggested that Gaza could become the “Riviera of the Middle East.” The consequences of this type of leadership style are bound to be disastrous.
Certain leaders, whose primary asset is their ability to market themselves, embrace maximalist rhetoric and actions. Most are strong, white men who project themselves as unwavering enforcers of power, constantly pushing its limits. Their notions of masculinity often manifest in crass, irreverent, and misogynistic behavior, showing little regard for empathy, moderation, or emotional intelligence. They use public appearances and social media to intimidate and insult critics. Political opponents, critical media, and independent cultural figures must be marginalized—if not eliminated altogether. Calls for humility and compassion are dismissed when power is driven by vengeance and resentment. Ultimately, these leaders monetize their influence, as seen with the widespread commercialization of MAGA-branded merchandise.
The second level concerns the breakdown of a rules-based order. Trump articulated this explicitly on February 16 in Truth Social and X, declaring that “saving one’s country is not illegal.” Meanwhile, Vice President J.D. Vance stated in Munich that “judges cannot control the legitimate power of the executive.” His remarks aimed to justify the White House’s European policy, which seeks to dismantle the political cordon sanitaire preventing the far right from regaining power in Germany after eighty years—despite their support nearing 20% of the electorate.
Institutionally, the foundational principles of the Western consensus, rooted in Enlightenment values and first realized in the American and French revolutions of the late 18th century, are being profoundly challenged. Constitutional norms are being rendered meaningless, their enforcement eroded from within. Any attempt at reform is blocked and dismissed as serving an entrenched elite. Today, power appears to dictate the law.
The third and final level relates to the social anomie brought about by the digital revolution, which has profoundly reshaped the landscape. Dominated by massive tech conglomerates leading stock markets, the surveillance economy now dictates how companies compete for public attention. The rule of law, separation of powers, fundamental rights, democracy, and freedom are all threatened by Silicon Valley’s imperial project—now embedded within the heart of the White House. If plutocracy was once a looming risk, it is now an undeniable reality.
A new paradigm in policymaking has emerged, reshaping public administration as it existed throughout the past century. The U.S. Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has been granted sweeping powers to dismantle substantial portions of the federal government, making Argentina’s Milei-inspired “chainsaw” imagery a tangible reality. Meanwhile, security, identity, and a peculiar interpretation of “freedom” grounded in libertarian technocracy align with longstanding neoliberal ideals, directly opposing the diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies that had guided the past 25 years.
These trends are evident—to varying degrees—in the political landscapes of Argentina, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, and Paraguay, as well as during Bolsonaro’s tenure in Brazil. Altogether, these nations represent a third of Latin America. The Colombian cabinet’s bizarre, live-streamed meeting on February 4 may seem like an outlier, yet any attentive observer of Colombian politics will find echoes of the themes discussed here.
*Machine translation proofread by Ricardo Aceves.
Autor
Director of CIEPS - International Center for Political and Social Studies, AIP-Panama. Professor Emeritus at the University of Salamanca and UPB (Medellín). Latest books: "The profession of politician" (Tecnos Madrid, 2020) and "Traces of a tired democracy" (Océano Atlántico Editores, 2024).
