The urgent need to revitalize global democratic systems is a challenge faced by nations that have embraced this model for societal development. The world is a mosaic of options, some more successful than others, yielding various levels of benefits for their citizens.
It is no secret that democracy has been used to justify both good and bad politicians who, driven by their hunger for power, wrap themselves in banners of progressivism to exploit resentments, xenophobia, racism, and nativism (Jon Lee Anderson, El Tiempo 10-08-2025). This deepens issues caused by elite corruption, as evident in countries like Colombia, the United States, Russia, and Venezuela.
The impact of new technologies, social media, and the myth of Artificial Intelligence on truth and the democratization of information is causing damages that compel both governments and citizens to seek necessary regulation and to strengthen civic responsibility.
It is essential to restore the role of truth in democracy because it is through truth that rationalism can be reclaimed for making decisions that benefit society. However, it is also true that in this turbulent era, lies have become entrenched, disguising falsehoods in the name of populism and a nationalism that is dragging nations back into old and harmful paradigms like xenophobia, rampant consumerism, and relationships hinging on zero-sum games.
The USA is the nation poised to lead the correction of this harmful deviation; it is the one setting the bad example. After the conclusion of World War II (1945), it took the helm of liberalism, democracy, and capitalism, as its former ally, the Soviet Union under Joseph Stalin, emerged as its greatest adversary in the struggle for world power.
By the end of the 20th century, the USA’s strategy to create a new multipolar decision-making model and to establish democracy as the prevailing system took shape, albeit not without mistakes. As articulated by US Lieutenant Colonel Jimmie Holt in March 1990, “Historically, the USA has played a significant role in the development of democracy. Unfortunately, the shift toward democratic civil governments hasn’t been accompanied by growth and development in social and economic sectors. The second reason for unrest stemmed from the identification of established oppressive structures.”
Holt also emphasized the need to shift from traditional military thinking centered on territorial control to understanding that communist guerrilla movements now hinge on “controlling polarized popular will.” Revolutionaries throughout Latin America trained according to the Cuban model. Yet, throughout the 1960s, rural insurgencies modeled after the Cuban revolution were repeatedly defeated, giving rise to a new type of revolutionary who focused activities in urban areas through clandestine political organizations, political agitation, civil disturbances, and terrorism, much like Gustavo Petro in Colombia and Hugo Chávez in Venezuela. However, Jon Lee points out that “they aren’t doing anything… because they’ve become trapped in caudillismo and the most outdated forms of populism.”
This neglect to adapt to the left’s changing focus has contributed to some of the current problems affecting democracies, mainly in Latin America. On the global stage, Professor Joseph Nye Jr. explored the shifts driven by the USA after World War II in his article “The Transformation of Global Power” (March 1990), which included the establishment of a multinational institutional framework for seeking consensual solutions.
This shift from unipolar to multipolar power was a significant challenge that could forge a globalized, participatory, democratic world founded on a strong sense of justice. Nevertheless, the establishment of new nations and the attacks from a seemingly vanquished left after the fall of the Soviet Union created complex scenarios. Now, with the rise of small interest groups vying for a slice of the pie, achieving the objectives of powerhouses like the USA has become difficult. Thus, Nye Jr. suggested that their leaders need to learn how to accomplish these goals using new power sources.
This means the USA must manage interdependence, navigate the new international structure, and uphold common values. Additionally, it involves reevaluating power options traditionally viewed as economic and military strength. Now, the use of military intervention to balance power must factor in persuasion, social contact impact, economic interdependence, and the functionality of international institutions.
Currently, military options for superpowers come with high costs in their pursuit of balancing strategic interests to ensure their security; the USA has faced these challenges in wars in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Russia is experiencing similar issues with its invasion of Ukraine. Both experiences demonstrate that the international system is the result of years of effort to seek balance among states using bipolarity and multipolarity in decision-making, necessitating a distribution of power as issues become increasingly interdependent.
Nye suggested that the shifting dynamics of global politics impact issue prioritization, forcing a blend of traditional military instruments with strategies for coactive power balancing. The increasing economic, technological, and communicative interdependence, along with sensitive issues like the environment and health, complicate powerhouses’ efforts to achieve their objectives because managing interdependence incurs more costs.
In the globalization strategy, the biggest benefactor is the USA, which includes the dissemination of its mass culture that has spread its values and customs through media, now amplified by the Internet and social networks that have rendered it the ideal place to live, study, or invest. For decades, Hollywood, for instance, has been influential in shaping behaviors, while industries have imposed rampant consumerism that has enriched companies, yet also increased environmental pollution.
It is also true that the USA’s involvement in global discussions on key issues is significant due to its pivotal role in seeking vital solutions, as seen with recent events related to security and drug trafficking in Latin America.
However, as Nye warned, these commitments require understanding that power is increasingly coercive. Factors like diplomacy, economic sanctions, international institutions, and the option of military force must be balanced to achieve national interests. This dynamic demands extensive interpretation, dialogue, and actions that realize the theoretical principles of democracy and capitalism as forces of Western culture.
@hdelgado10