In recent years, democracy has been experiencing a new political cycle, the signs of which are complex and its course uncertain. Beyond the changes in the political map of Latin America, the disconnect between politics and society has intensified, and a geopolitical reconfiguration has occurred with consequences for the region's political dynamics. Among these signs, the transformations in the representative bond stand out, and consequently, in the role of political parties and leaders; in collective action, with the political incursion of middle-class sectors and the presence of evangelical religious groups; and finally, in the patterns of civic engagement, which bring to the forefront demands for equality and recognition of diversity, where the women's movement is particularly prominent.

The political map has clearly changed, as have the interpretations of that change. There is a consensus regarding the exhaustion of the political cycle that harks back to the "turn to the left" that began at the start of the century, because of the group of governments labeled "progressive" and/or "populist," only Uruguay, Bolivia, and Venezuela remain. The first two countries held elections in October 2019, and the continued rule of the Broad Front and the Movement for Socialism (MAS) is uncertain. In Venezuela, the political crisis is at a catastrophic stalemate because neither side has a chance of winning, and the prospects for an agreement are very slim. Furthermore, the strength of the democracy/authoritarianism divide demands a rethinking of the notion of "progressivism" in the case of Nicolás Maduro's government. The Argentine elections, also in October, will determine whether Kirchnerism returns—an unforeseen option four years ago—or whether Mauricio Macri continues in power. Macri's 2015 victory marks the beginning of what some analysts call a "turn to the right," most clearly expressed in Jair Bolsonaro's victory in Brazil, which, as a counterpoint to the Venezuelan case, is another manifestation of the resurgence of the democracy/authoritarianism divide. Chile, with Sebastián Piñera, and Colombia, with Iván Duque, are also experiencing this "turn." In contrast, the cases of Ecuador and Peru present unique characteristics. In Ecuador, Kuczynski's resignation and his replacement by the vice president diluted the Peruvian government's ideological affiliation; in Peru, the attempt to maintain the "Correismo" movement resulted in Lenin Moreno's government rejecting the Alianza País project, and Moreno's affiliation is also questionable.

If we add to this Andrés Manuel López Obrador's resounding victory in Mexico at the head of MORENA in 2018 and the possibility of victory for the Alberto Fernández and Cristina Fernández ticket in Argentina this coming October—something also likely for Daniel Martínez in Uruguay and Evo Morales in Bolivia—the panorama becomes more complex. To this must be added the geopolitical factor because since Donald Trump's victory in the United States, the relationship between the US government and Latin America has changed, not only by promoting conservative forces in the region but also by directly influencing political processes, for example, in Venezuela, or by supporting initiatives like the Lima Group, which run counter to those previously promoted by "progressive" governments, such as UNASUR. This shift demands attention to US domestic politics to assess its influence in the region.

This set of national situations places the issue of democracy at the center of the debate, highlighting the diversity of conceptions about its meaning and the tensions or disjunctions between the social and the institutional, between equality and freedom. The socioeconomic achievements of “progressive” governments were overshadowed by criticism of institutional deficits and the weakness of the rule of law; conversely, the actions of “right-wing” governments are questioned for their economic adjustment measures that harm the popular sectors and benefit business interests.

The limitations of institutional politics in processing social demands and political disputes are evident, not only because the capacity of political parties and actors is in question, but also because of the transformations in the public sphere, where the role of digital social networks stands out. In several cases, these networks have influenced electoral processes, further problematizing the logic of political representation. Additionally, this influence is accompanied by a return of ideology to the electoral contest, but in its negative aspect—that is, not as political interpellation but as manipulation—through fake news and the use of algorithms to define voter profiles and influence their electoral preferences through ad-hoc messages.

For a decade, the Working Group on “Citizenship, popular organizations and political representation” has been reflecting on these issues based on a general reflection on the mutations in contemporary democracy, privileging electoral processes and based on thematic axes that allow a comparative view of politics in the region.

Latin American politics constantly displays novel features linked to social, economic, and cultural transformations that manifest themselves in electoral events and their political and institutional effects. The weakening of progressive or left-wing governments and political forces that advocate positions opposed to neoliberalism and promote a state-centric model is one such manifestation. The return and/or prominence of traditional political parties, with a discourse opposed to state reform and populism, demonstrates the diversity of approaches to the scope of political and economic reforms. However, it is crucial to avoid the dichotomy of statism versus neoliberalism, and it is also necessary to overcome the apparent contradiction between populism and social democracy in order to understand the characteristics of the political process in the region. Democracy is constantly changing, affecting the patterns of political representation and the modalities of citizen participation. This is compounded by a foreseeable increase in social conflict and the growing influence of the public sphere, especially digital social networks. In connection with the transformation of the public sphere, new forms of civic engagement are emerging, characterized by collective action that extends beyond electoral participation in the formation of public powers. However, in some circumstances, these actions are channeled institutionally due to the incorporation of direct and participatory democracy institutions in several countries and the plebiscitary logic that characterizes popular consultations. In other words, the effectiveness of the citizen's vote is greater, but democracy is not limited to voting because there is close scrutiny of governmental performance, which sometimes manifests itself through social protests or electoral sanctions, reflecting the tensions between the legitimacy of the mandate's origin, based on the ballot box, and the legitimacy of the rulers according to the assessment of their performance, given that they are under the constant scrutiny of the citizenry. The existence of a kind of contingent citizen action underlies protests and conflicts, but it takes the form of a citizen movement when demands or claims for greater security, quality employment, environmental protection, and respect for human rights come into play. These issues take on greater significance due to the political changes that have become evident since 2015, with a shift away from the political orientations that prevailed since the beginning of the 21st century, opening a phase of political uncertainty in the region.

In recent years, democracy has been experiencing a new political cycle, the signs of which are complex and its course uncertain. Beyond the changes in the political map of Latin America, the disconnect between politics and society has intensified, and a geopolitical reconfiguration has occurred with consequences for the region's political dynamics. Among these signs, the transformations in the representative bond stand out, and consequently, in the role of political parties and leaders; in collective action, with the political incursion of middle-class sectors and the presence of evangelical religious groups; and finally, in the patterns of civic engagement, which bring to the forefront demands for equality and recognition of diversity, where the women's movement is particularly prominent.

The political map has clearly changed, as have the interpretations of that change. There is a consensus regarding the exhaustion of the political cycle that harks back to the "turn to the left" that began at the start of the century, because of the group of governments labeled "progressive" and/or "populist," only Uruguay, Bolivia, and Venezuela remain. The first two countries held elections in October 2019, and the continued rule of the Broad Front and the Movement for Socialism (MAS) is uncertain. In Venezuela, the political crisis is at a catastrophic stalemate because neither side has a chance of winning, and the prospects for an agreement are very slim. Furthermore, the strength of the democracy/authoritarianism divide demands a rethinking of the notion of "progressivism" in the case of Nicolás Maduro's government. The Argentine elections, also in October, will determine whether Kirchnerism returns—an unforeseen option four years ago—or whether Mauricio Macri continues in power. Macri's 2015 victory marks the beginning of what some analysts call a "turn to the right," most clearly expressed in Jair Bolsonaro's victory in Brazil, which, as a counterpoint to the Venezuelan case, is another manifestation of the resurgence of the democracy/authoritarianism divide. Chile, with Sebastián Piñera, and Colombia, with Iván Duque, are also experiencing this "turn." In contrast, the cases of Ecuador and Peru present unique characteristics. In Ecuador, Kuczynski's resignation and his replacement by the vice president diluted the Peruvian government's ideological affiliation; in Peru, the attempt to maintain the "Correismo" movement resulted in Lenin Moreno's government rejecting the Alianza País project, and Moreno's affiliation is also questionable.

If we add to this Andrés Manuel López Obrador's resounding victory in Mexico at the head of MORENA in 2018 and the possibility of victory for the Alberto Fernández and Cristina Fernández ticket in Argentina this coming October—something also likely for Daniel Martínez in Uruguay and Evo Morales in Bolivia—the panorama becomes more complex. To this must be added the geopolitical factor because since Donald Trump's victory in the United States, the relationship between the US government and Latin America has changed, not only by promoting conservative forces in the region but also by directly influencing political processes, for example, in Venezuela, or by supporting initiatives like the Lima Group, which run counter to those previously promoted by "progressive" governments, such as UNASUR. This shift demands attention to US domestic politics to assess its influence in the region.

This set of national situations places the issue of democracy at the center of the debate, highlighting the diversity of conceptions about its meaning and the tensions or disjunctions between the social and the institutional, between equality and freedom. The socioeconomic achievements of “progressive” governments were overshadowed by criticism of institutional deficits and the weakness of the rule of law; conversely, the actions of “right-wing” governments are questioned for their economic adjustment measures that harm the popular sectors and benefit business interests.

The limitations of institutional politics in processing social demands and political disputes are evident, not only because the capacity of political parties and actors is in question, but also because of the transformations in the public sphere, where the role of digital social networks stands out. In several cases, these networks have influenced electoral processes, further problematizing the logic of political representation. Additionally, this influence is accompanied by a return of ideology to the electoral contest, but in its negative aspect—that is, not as political interpellation but as manipulation—through fake news and the use of algorithms to define voter profiles and influence their electoral preferences through ad-hoc messages.

For a decade, the Working Group on “Citizenship, popular organizations and political representation” has been reflecting on these issues based on a general reflection on the mutations in contemporary democracy, privileging electoral processes and based on thematic axes that allow a comparative view of politics in the region.

Latin American politics constantly displays novel features linked to social, economic, and cultural transformations that manifest themselves in electoral events and their political and institutional effects. The weakening of progressive or left-wing governments and political forces that advocate positions opposed to neoliberalism and promote a state-centric model is one such manifestation. The return and/or prominence of traditional political parties, with a discourse opposed to state reform and populism, demonstrates the diversity of approaches to the scope of political and economic reforms. However, it is crucial to avoid the dichotomy of statism versus neoliberalism, and it is also necessary to overcome the apparent contradiction between populism and social democracy in order to understand the characteristics of the political process in the region. Democracy is constantly changing, affecting the patterns of political representation and the modalities of citizen participation. This is compounded by a foreseeable increase in social conflict and the growing influence of the public sphere, especially digital social networks. In connection with the transformation of the public sphere, new forms of civic engagement are emerging, characterized by collective action that extends beyond electoral participation in the formation of public powers. However, in some circumstances, these actions are channeled institutionally due to the incorporation of direct and participatory democracy institutions in several countries and the plebiscitary logic that characterizes popular consultations. In other words, the effectiveness of the citizen's vote is greater, but democracy is not limited to voting because there is close scrutiny of governmental performance, which sometimes manifests itself through social protests or electoral sanctions, reflecting the tensions between the legitimacy of the mandate's origin, based on the ballot box, and the legitimacy of the rulers according to the assessment of their performance, given that they are under the constant scrutiny of the citizenry. The existence of a kind of contingent citizen action underlies protests and conflicts, but it takes the form of a citizen movement when demands or claims for greater security, quality employment, environmental protection, and respect for human rights come into play. These issues take on greater significance due to the political changes that have become evident since 2015, with a shift away from the political orientations that prevailed since the beginning of the 21st century, opening a phase of political uncertainty in the region.