Before officially knowing the results of the second election, the president of Uruguay, Luis Lacalle Pou, congratulated Yamandú Orsi, the candidate of the Frente Amplio, for his victory in the presidential elections. In a gesture that reflected the country's democratic tradition, Lacalle pou used his social networks to announce the call in which he recognized the triumph of his opponent and guaranteed an orderly and respectful transition with the institutions.
“Call me at @OrsiYamandu to congratulate him as president-elect of our country and to acatar las reglas, starting the transition with the corresponding entities,” wrote Lacalle Pou in his message. This type of activity, often daily in Uruguay, is a reflection of the solid democratic system that characterizes the country, a model that has been recognized as one of the best in Latin America and in the world.
Uruguay stands out for the political coexistence that it has built over the years, based on mutual respect, the peaceful alternation of power and active citizen participation. Unlike many other democracies in the region, the country has maintained a stable system, with historic political parties such as the Partido Colorado and the Partido Nacional, which dates back to 1836, and the Frente Amplio, founded in 1971. This institutional stability has allowed Uruguay has positioned itself as a democratic reference point, even in a global context.
In the most recent elections, Yamandú Orsi, of the Frente Amplio, obtained an ajustada victoria over Álvaro Delgado, of the Partido Nacional and representative of the centroderecha coalition. The difference was less than 100,000 votes, equivalent to only four percentage points. This result reflects a polarized society, divided between two almost identical apoyo blocs. However, polarization in Uruguay, although evident, has a distinct form from that observed in other countries in the region.
Ideological polarization is a phenomenon that has gained ground in the country, even if it has not reached the levels of confrontation that are perceived in other democracies. According to political scientist Giovanni Sartori, polarization can have positive effects if it remains within certain limits. On the one hand, you enable citizens to identify clear policy options and strengthen ties between parties and their voters. On the other hand, you can become a challenge if conflicts exceed the shadow of tolerance, endangering governability. In the case of Uruguay, polarization was managed in a way that fomented debate and strengthened democratic values, without having to destabilize institutions.
During the campaign, he demonstrated that political competence in Uruguay does not erode democratic coexistence. In the streets of Montevideo, the parties carry out their activities in a close and respectful way, with carpas de campaña installed a few meters away from each other. Included in voting centers, candidates show exemplary behavior. Álvaro Delgado, for example, waited patiently in line to cast his vote, interacting cordially with the citizens. These gestures that might seem like simple formalities distance themselves from their exceptionality in a continent where political tensions generate conflicts and mistrust.
Uruguay is not only an example of political coexistence, but is also recognized as one of the most advanced democracies in the world. In agreement with the Instituto Internacional para la Democracia y la Asistencia Electoral (IDEA Internacional), Uruguay occupies the first places in political representation, human rights, state of rights and citizen participation. These indicate the level position of countries like Germany, reflecting the quality of its democratic system.
A key element in the strength of Uruguayan democracy is respect for the unwritten rules that guarantee the stability of the system. These informal norms, which appear neither in the Constitution nor in laws, are essential for the healthy functioning of any democracy. As politicians Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt pointed out in their work How democracy diesmutual respect between political actors and acceptance of democratic norms are key to avoiding the deterioration of institutions. In Uruguay, both Lacalle Pou and his predecessor, José Mujica, have demonstrated this compromise in resisting changing the rules of the game to seek immediate re-election, something that contrasts with usual practices in other countries in the region.
This tradition of respect and tolerance has allowed Uruguay to maintain alternations in power without sobresaltos, strengthening the city's trust in its institutions. Yamandú Orsi, in his Victory speech, precisely described these values as the desire for “wide life for our republican and democratic system”. His words are a record that the Uruguayan model is not only based on laws, but on a profound compromise with democratic practices.
However, the new president will face major challenges. One of the most immediate will be governed without a clear parliamentary mayor, who will require a constant effort to build consensus. Despite these difficulties, the solidity of the Uruguayan system leaves a mark that political differences can be resolved without endangering the country's stability.
In addition to the ideological polarization, present as mayor or less medida in all democracies, Uruguay has managed to avoid the so-called “affective polarization”, a phenomenon that has often spread to countries such as the United States and Spain. This form of polarization is characterized by a negative perception of political opponents, who see them as enemies or illegitimate actors. In Uruguay, however, the ideological differences did not arise from a destructive clash, which allowed cooperation and respect between the leaders of the different parties to be preserved.
The case of Uruguay demonstrates that it is possible to maintain a lively and functional democracy in a polarized context, always and when unwritten rules are respected and the common good is privileged over partisan interests. Yamandú Orsi's victory opens a new chapter in the country's political history and his ability to govern will depend much on his ability to maintain the values that have stood out in Uruguay as a democratic exception in Latin America.
In a continent where political crisis and attempts to perpetuate it in power are frequent, Uruguay continues to be an example of how democratic coexistence can be not just an ideal, but a reality. Peaceful alternation, mutual respect and acceptance of the rules of the game are principles that not only strengthen institutions but also inspire confidence in the future. Yamandú Orsi inherits a bond of stability and good governance, and the outcome of his mandate will depend on his ability to preserve and strengthen this unique model in the region.
