From the perspective of ordinary people, politics is psychology and communication. For most voters, politics consists of fleeting images that appear like flashes among countless other stimuli. The rest of politics—its nuances, complexity, programs, and proposals—is simply ignored.
We human beings are savers of cognitive effort. Our brains evolved to survive, feel emotions, and think logically. To carry out all those functions, we need to avoid doing many others. As psychologists Susan Fiske and Shelley Taylor coined, we are “cognitive misers,” constantly seeking shortcuts and effortless reasoning. Out of all the daily stimuli, we pay attention to only a few. In general, those that capture our attention most, are easiest to process, or carry strong emotional weight are the ones that occupy our cognition.
In the political sphere, emotions explain voting behavior far more precisely than alignment with policy platforms, socioeconomic belonging, or other variables that once were useful. Extreme sentiments such as hatred and affection structure electoral competition and energize public conversation.
In Latin America we live in societies where, on average, 7 out of 10 people are not interested in politics, where speeches, events, and bureaucratic processes bore them, and where we feel that what happens in offices, ministries, and palaces harms us or simply has no impact on our lives. Thinking of communication as images or brief flashes means understanding that today we care more about what we see in our Instagram feed than what appears on news sites or in the excessive volume of content many politicians work so hard to publish. Given this voluntary disconnection from politics, it should not surprise us that a high percentage of voters decide their vote only hours before an election. In 2025, in Ecuador and Argentina, 3 out of 10 voters were undecided the day before voting; in Bolivia, the figure reached 48%. In many cases, the decision is made minutes before placing the ballot in the box.
Part of the debate among academics, consultants, and politicians today concerns what is driving the disconnect between politics and voters. While it is a multi-causal phenomenon, one key factor is the sense of uncertainty that politics cannot alleviate. Nihilism is a growing sentiment in Latin America. IPSOS recently published a study finding that 7 out of 10 Latin Americans agree with the statement, “I live for today because the future is uncertain.” It reflects a rising uncertainty among people who, after discarding the possibility of a better future, decide to enjoy the present at any cost.
In many cases, this sentiment translates into consumption (eliminating saving and investment), over-indebtedness, rushed decisions, and above all, deep frustration over perceived restrictions. This value—which in 2025 reached nearly 72%—was almost 5 points lower in 2024. While the study surveyed only Mexico, Colombia, Chile, Argentina, Brazil, and Peru, the values across these six countries show little variation, except for Argentina, where the number reaches 78% (indicating greater nihilism). Brazil has the lowest figure in the group (66%), while the rest range between 69% and 71%. Although Latin America’s experience (72%) sits above the global average (66%) and that of other continents, the trend toward pessimism is clear.
Pessimism, growing uncertainty, and the inability to envision a better future are everyday realities for many Latin Americans. This is a major challenge for politics. Voters form their support not only on the basis of what has been done (retrospective voting) or on their loves and hates (affective voting), but also on the path politics proposes to them (prospective voting. And while, as noted earlier, people avoid excessive cognitive effort—meaning they will avoid reading programs or devoting time to understanding every candidate and proposal—it is equally true that effective communication should be able to distill into a few key points how people’s quality of life will be improved. For a voter to decide to support a candidate, they need to be clear about where that candidate intends to take them.
In The Shadows of Tomorrow, sociologist Norbert Lechner argues that people turn to politics to obtain a framework of order that reduces the uncertainties of everyday life. It is not just about security or coexistence: that desired order is, above all, the capacity to orient oneself, to understand where we come from, to read the challenges of the present, and to chart a future direction that makes life more livable.
Autor
Professor at the University of Buenos Aires (UBA) and the University of Belgrano, Argentina, where he also conducts research on political and electoral behavior, political communication, and political psychology. He holds a Master's degree from FLACSO and is a political scientist and sociologist from the UBA.
