Colombia is entering a politically charged election season in which a new force on the radical right is rapidly gaining momentum. Abelardo de la Espriella, a lawyer turned political outsider, has emerged as the most prominent figure of an ultraconservative movement that is reshaping the country’s political debate ahead of the May 31 election. His rise reflects a broader global pattern in which anti-establishment candidates channel public frustration into hardline messages on security, national identity, and institutional distrust.
De la Espriella has positioned himself as the defender of what he calls a “patria milagro,” a vision of Colombia rooted in traditional values, strict security policies, and economic nationalism. In his rhetoric, the political left is dismissed as “communism,” while centrist parties are portrayed as ineffective and indistinguishable from the establishment he seeks to overturn. His campaign has resonated with segments of a society deeply affected by violence, inequality, and frustration with political elites.
Observers note that this type of political phenomenon is not unique to Colombia. Analysts cited by Nature and regional political experts argue that similar movements have gained traction across Latin America and Europe, often emerging where traditional parties fail to address persistent social and economic grievances. Franco Delle Donne, author of Epidemia ultra, describes the rise of radical right movements as a symptom of weakened democratic institutions and declining trust in mainstream political actors.
According to Delle Donne, the appeal of these movements lies in their promise of decisive action in systems perceived as ineffective. When established institutions are seen as unable to solve problems, voters may become more receptive to leaders who present themselves as outsiders willing to bypass traditional constraints. In this framing, radical right leaders argue that the liberal democratic system itself is the obstacle to solving urgent issues such as crime and economic instability.
De la Espriella’s campaign reflects this logic. His message emphasizes restoring order through strong leadership and uncompromising policies, particularly on security. His rhetoric has found support among ultraconservative political groups such as Salvación Nacional and Colombia Justa Libres, as well as among influential political and media figures. His alliance network also includes controversial public personalities whose statements have previously generated national debate, further amplifying his visibility and reach.
A key feature of his campaign has been its ability to dominate digital platforms. Political analysts note that social media has fundamentally changed the mechanics of electoral competition, allowing candidates to bypass traditional media gatekeepers and reach voters directly. In this new environment, visibility is no longer dependent on established party structures or mainstream media coverage. Instead, viral content, influencer networks, and algorithmic amplification play a decisive role.
De la Espriella’s online presence has been particularly strong, supported by a coordinated ecosystem of digital influencers who extend his messaging across platforms. This strategy has helped him outpace other, even more radical contenders, including Santiago Botero, whose openly anti-system rhetoric has struggled to achieve similar traction. The digital dimension of the campaign reflects a broader global trend in which political communication increasingly operates through decentralized online networks.
The surge of the radical right is also forcing Colombia’s traditional conservative bloc into a difficult position. After the election of Gustavo Petro as Colombia’s first left-wing president in decades, the political right has been attempting to reorganize and reclaim electoral ground. However, the emergence of stronger outsider figures has fragmented the conservative space, weakening established leadership and complicating efforts to present a unified alternative to the governing left.
Paloma Valencia, a senator closely associated with former president Álvaro Uribe, has been positioned as the leading figure of the traditional right. Uribe himself continues to exert significant influence over conservative politics in Colombia, having played a decisive role in previous electoral victories. Yet despite this backing, Valencia has struggled to gain traction in opinion polls, falling behind both the left-wing candidate Iván Cepeda and De la Espriella.
Political strategist Camilo Rojas attributes this shift to the changing nature of opposition politics. In his view, De la Espriella has been more effective in capturing the central emotional driver of the current political moment: rejection of the left-wing government. While Valencia has attempted to broaden her appeal by selecting centrist figures such as Juan Daniel Oviedo as a running mate, critics argue that this strategy has diluted her message and reduced her appeal among voters seeking a more confrontational alternative.
This dynamic is not unique to Colombia. Across multiple democracies, centrist and traditional right-wing parties have struggled to contain the rise of more radical movements. In Argentina, mainstream conservatives were absorbed into Javier Milei’s insurgent campaign. In Chile, moderate right-wing candidates were overtaken by José Antonio Kast. In the United States, the Republican Party has been reshaped by the influence of Donald Trump’s MAGA movement, while in Brazil, Jair Bolsonaro’s political legacy continues to dominate the conservative space.
Historians and political scientists suggest that while these movements differ in style and national context, they share a common foundation: dissatisfaction with political institutions and a preference for simplified, emotionally charged narratives. Historian Germán Mejía Pavony argues that Colombia’s emerging radical right lacks deep ideological structure, instead relying on opposition to the current government and the symbolic invocation of fears associated with socialism or communism.
According to Mejía Pavony, much of the movement’s appeal lies in its ability to offer clear, direct answers to complex problems. Proposals such as building high-security prisons, expanding punitive measures, and reducing the size of the state resonate with voters frustrated by persistent insecurity and perceived governmental inefficiency. However, he warns that the movement’s ideological depth may become more visible if it were to gain power, potentially leading to debates over civil rights, social equality, and institutional freedoms.
These concerns reflect broader anxieties among political observers about the future trajectory of Colombia’s democracy. While De la Espriella has not yet outlined a fully developed governing agenda, critics suggest that a potential administration could challenge existing protections related to gender equality, diversity, and pluralism. At present, much of the campaign discourse has remained focused on security and national identity, but analysts warn that deeper ideological positions may emerge more clearly if electoral success follows.
Despite uncertainty over whether De la Espriella will advance to a likely second round, many experts believe that the conditions enabling his rise are likely to persist. Even if his campaign does not ultimately succeed, the political space he has helped open could endure, encouraging future candidates to adopt similar rhetoric and strategies.
De la Espriella himself has stated that he would leave politics if unsuccessful in this election. However, political observers question whether the movement he represents can be so easily contained. The combination of public frustration, weakened party structures, and the accelerating influence of social media suggests that the radical right may remain a significant force in Colombian politics well beyond the current electoral cycle.
As Colombia approaches its vote, the central question is no longer only who will win, but how deeply the country’s political realignment will reshape its democratic landscape in the years ahead.
