BUENOS AIRES — The reelection last month of Ecuador‘s conservative president, Daniel Noboa, didn’t happen in a vacuum. It is part of a broader regional trend of voters preferring what they perceive as effective, swift leadership over traditional ideologies.
Above all, voters are responding to the “law-and-order” theme. Noboa now joins a diverse set of political figures including Argentina’s Javier Milei, El Salvador’s Nayib Bukele and even Chile’s socialist president, Gabriel Boric.
In spite of their differences, all share the same electoral backdrop: the collapse of traditional parties, a crisis of political representation and a widespread public demand for governments that “get things done.”
For the latest news & views from every corner of the world, Worldcrunch Today is the only truly international newsletter. Sign up here.
Thus, rather than ideology as historically understood, this new political moment is centered on results. Citizens in the region are no longer moved by party platforms but by such everyday concerns as security, employment and stability. Weary voters, exasperated as they are with broken promises and political scandals, no longer ask “what’s the plan?” but rather “can they deliver?”
In this context, Ecuador’s Noboa emerges as a youthful figure with no partisan baggage and a message focused on practical solutions. His reelection campaign was centered on continuing a brief but palpably effective first presidential term: cracking down on crime, projecting a tough stance against gangs and cartels, and using communication as a powerful tool of governance.
The phenomenon does not, however, spell the end of politics — it’s a transformation. The rhetoric of efficiency and order is often presented as neutral, technocratic, and ideology-free. But in truth, it marks the rise of a new worldview, one that looks apolitical but is, in essence, an ideology of its own.
This seemingly non-ideological stance is in fact embedded subtly in every decision and policy. This new style is reducing politics to management and will often compare the state to running a business. Presidents become CEOs, and whatever “works” becomes accepted, and dominant, even justifying an accumulation of powers in the name of results.
Boric’s pragmatism
Chile’s Gabriel Boric offers an interesting counterpoint here. He won power off a progressive platform including structural reforms with a strong ideological component. But he soon faced the harsh realities of political fragmentation, economic pressure, and high public expectations.
They like to speak directly to citizens, without parties or coalitions acting as go-betweens.
His government has had to transition toward a more pragmatic stance, shifting toward the political Center and partly ditching its talk of re-founding the whole of Chile as a political entity. His case shows how tensions between transformative ideals and the needs of government make it difficult to sustain ideological projects in this climate of public haste and skepticism.
In Argentina, President Javier Milei’s narrative is based on the proposition of a total break: he dismisses all politicians in the country as a “caste,” and wants a total overhaul of the Argentine economic model. By comparison, Noboa represents a more refined and managerial form of disruption. But both have exploited the public’s frustration with corruption, clientelism and state inefficiency. Both like to speak directly to citizens, without traditional parties or grand coalitions acting as go-betweens.
Effectiveness, without social sensitivity, can easily backfire.
What unites these new leadership styles is not an ideological current but the answer to the question: How do you restore the connection between state and citizen? It is a question that has helped morph the ideological or party-oriented vote into a practical vote — turning voters into pragmatists, not affiliates or supporters. And yet, we must insist: even if it doesn’t look like it, this kind of pragmatism is also, in itself, an ideology. It’s a form of power that favors results over deliberation, outcomes over process, and optics over institutional structures.
Redefining political power
There is a deeper risk here: in countries like Ecuador, Argentina or El Salvador, these new leaderships have taken over decades of welfare-oriented systems that models that — despite their flaws — provided basic social safety nets to millions. To dismantle those systems in the name of efficiency or fiscal adjustment, without offering sustainable alternatives, risks deepening exclusion. Effectiveness, without social sensitivity, can easily backfire.
Noboa’s recent re-election confirms Latin America is currently redefining the notion of political power. Emerging leaders are no longer defined by classic ideologies but by their perceived ability to respond to public demands for order and effectiveness. The challenge for all of them will be proving that a performance-based politics doesn’t end up hollowing out democracy itself. Are these leaders up to the task of meeting Latin America’s current, and historical, needs?
