A Comparative Analysis of Populism in Latin American Politics (Case Studies: Bolivia, Argentina and Brazil)

Zamani M and Kashi LV

Published on: 2025-11-01

Abstract

Populism, as one of the most complex and multifaceted phenomena in contemporary politics, has emerged in Latin America as a recurring and historical pattern. Since the mid-twentieth century, this region has witnessed the rise of leaders who, relying on anti-imperialist, justice-oriented, and mass-based discourses, have challenged the existing political and economic order. The aim of this study is to provide a comparative analysis of populism in three countries-Bolivia, Argentina, and Brazil-in order to identify their structural, discursive, and institutional similarities and differences. Theoretically, the research is grounded in Ernesto Laclau’s perspective and the neo-classical approaches to populism, which conceptualize it not merely as a policy orientation or governance style, but as a discourse that constructs a dichotomy between “the people” and “the elites,” deriving its legitimacy from the tension between these two poles.

In the first case study, Bolivia under Evo Morales represents an indigenous and socialist form of populism emphasizing resource redistribution, indigenous identity, and resistance to U.S. influence. Morales succeeded in mobilizing indigenous groups and the lower classes, creating a new sense of social cohesion; however, over time, his centralization of power in the presidency and the restriction of democratic institutions weakened political pluralism. By contrast, the Argentine experience-especially during the Peronist and Kirchnerist eras-illustrates a hybrid form of populism combining economic nationalism, protectionism, and charismatic leadership. In Argentina, populism has functioned not only as a reaction to social inequality but also as a tool for political mobilization and for consolidating government legitimacy against the middle and upper classes.