Culture wars, discursive toxicity and the new authoritarianism in Latin America

by Elise Denis-Ramirez

October 2026

What happens when democratic language itself becomes the terrain of political struggle? What does it mean when concepts such as freedom, rights or democracy no longer provide a shared political language, but become a centre for contestation and strategic redefinition? These questions ran through two recent webinars organised by the Language & Society Hub at The Open University. One focused on Authoritarian Discourses and Rhetorical Strategies in Argentina and Brazil (21 May) and the other on Culture Wars across Latin America (23 July). Although the presentations addressed different contexts and topics, they shared a common concern around how the struggle for political power increasingly takes place through meaning-making.

They discussed how this results in a form of politics in which discourse is not only a reflection of social conflict but also its primary battleground. Therefore, understanding contemporary authoritarianism requires attention not only to what political actors do, but also to how they shape the meanings through which democratic societies understand themselves.

Culture Wars as Battles over Meaning and Values

A central point of the Culture Wars webinar was that today's conflicts extend far beyond policy disagreements. María Laura Pardo (Universidad de Buenos Aires-CONICET) and Alicia Carrizo (Universidad de Buenos Aires) showed how right-wing actors are appropriating and redefining concepts associated with democratic and progressive traditions. These movements draw on concepts that already have public legitimacy instead of introducing entirely new vocabularies. Words such as freedom, rights and democracy retain their positive associations while being redirected towards different political projects.

María Valentina Noblia (Universidad de Buenos Aires) highlighted how digital media accelerate these processes. Social media platforms facilitate the circulation and normalisation of slogans, narratives and interpretations, enabling political actors to influence public perceptions through repetition, visibility and emotional engagement. 

Thus, these perspectives showed how contemporary political conflicts are increasingly fought through disputes over values, identity and legitimacy. The Brazilian contributions further demonstrated that culture wars are not simply conflicts over beliefs but also struggles over who has the authority to define legitimate knowledge and public discourse.

Sabrine Weber (Universidade, Setor/Departamento, Cidade, UF, Argentina) and Adair Bonini (Universidade, Setor/Departamento, Cidade, UF, Brasil) examined culture wars in Brazil, arguing that disputes over values, identity and legitimacy have become central to political life. Digital media and ideological polarisation intensify struggles over what counts as legitimate knowledge and acceptable public discourse. Luzmara Curcino (CNPq / Universidade Federal de São Carlos) focused on the appropriation of democratic values within Brazilian right-wing discourse, particularly around freedom of expression. She showed how ideas traditionally associated with democratic participation are mobilised against media regulation and anti-disinformation initiatives, becoming incorporated into narratives of censorship and resistance.

Yet, while culture wars reshape the meanings attached to democratic values and public debate, other presentations explored the rhetorical strategies contemporary political leaders use to enact and amplify these struggles.

The Language of Polarisation and Exclusion

Alejandra Vitale (Instituto de Lingüística, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Argentina) examined the discourse of Argentine President Javier Milei. Drawing on a large corpus of his posts on X, she argued that verbal aggression functions as a strategic political resource. Vitale showed how insults, ridicule and dehumanising metaphors help construct Milei's anti-establishment identity. Opponents are represented as "rats", "cockroaches" or "mandrils", while Milei presents himself as an authentic outsider who rejects conventional political norms.

Vitale's analysis points to a broader issue around the strategic construction of political enemies through dehumanisation. This concern formed the starting point for Wander Emediato de Souza's (UFMG Belo Horizonte, Brazil) discussion of "discursive toxicity". He argued that far-right movements rely on practices such as disinformation, conspiracy theories, emotional manipulation and hate speech. Contemporary far-right discourse often echoes earlier authoritarian traditions (e.g. Nazi rhetoric) through enemy construction, nationalist rhetoric and attacks on democratic institutions. For Wander, dehumanisation is central to these processes, as opponents are represented as contaminants, parasites or threats, legitimising exclusion.

Gender at the Centre of Political Conflict

One of the strongest connections between the two webinars concerned gender politics. Helcira Lima (FALE/UFMG) argued that misogynistic discourse plays a central role in contemporary Brazilian far-right politics. Drawing on evidence of violence against women in public life, she showed how insults, harassment and public humiliation are frequently used to silence women politicians and restrict their participation. According to Lima, misogyny functions as a political strategy aimed at preserving traditional hierarchies.

These themes resonated strongly with the discussants' work. María Eugenia Maguiña Universidad Antonio Ruíz de Montoya, Perú) discussed anti-gender mobilisations in Peru, and Karen Cárdenas Almanza (UNAM, México) highlighted conflicts over education, values and national identity in Mexico. Across these contexts, gender and family have become key sites of political contestation. Luzmara Curcino also stressed the role of digital influencers, gaming cultures and online communities in spreading anti-feminist and far-right narratives, particularly among younger audiences.

What is the role of discourse analysis?

During the final discussion, a key question emerged: if far-right actors express their positions openly, what does discourse analysis still uncover? Participants suggested that scholars should focus less on revealing hidden meanings and more on tracing how ideas circulate across institutions, media platforms and national contexts. 

Together, the two webinars suggested that contemporary authoritarianism operates as much through language as through institutions. Understanding how concepts such as freedom, rights, equality and citizenship are contested has become a central challenge for scholars of language, politics and society.