Javier Milei's victory in the Argentine presidential elections has triggered a double reaction. From the ranks of the left, it is considered a triumph of the extreme right, a concept of variable geometry, extendable to anyone who dares to question the ideas and the gauchista agenda; From the so-called alternative right, especially European, this victory is seen as a success for his proposals. Both theses are erroneous or, to be precise, they represent a simplification or caricature of the thought and program of the new president of the Southern Republic, which are part of the liberal tradition. Therefore, the attempt to place him in the orbit of reactionary, authoritarian or fascist thought is surprising.
To begin with, Milei is not a conservative, but an anarcho-capitalist in the theoretical field – the desirability of a world without a State – transmuted into a classical liberal in the face of a basic restriction imposed by reality: the impossibility of achieving that objective. Therefore, his goal is more humble; namely, the reduction of state size and power to increase the sphere of autonomy and freedom of individuals. This vision is reflected in his public assumption of the conception of liberalism coined by his mentor Alberto Benegas Lynch Jr.: “Unrestricted respect for the life projects of others, based on the principle of non-aggression and the defense of the right to life, liberty and property.”
Milei's intellectual references are not situated in the realm of the alternative right of authors such as Patrick Deneen, Yoram Hazony, R.R. Reno or Alain de Benoist, to name some emblematic ideologues of that movement. Not even her program is anything like that of people like Orbán, Wilders or Le Pen. It is inserted in the philosophical heritage that goes from Juan Bautista Alberdi, inspirer of the liberal Constitution of 1853, to the aforementioned Alberto Benegas Lynch jr. in Argentina, and in that of thinkers such as Mises, Hayek, Friedman, Ayn Rand or Rothbard. That is so and, to be blunt, it is indisputable. His only closeness to the alternative right, as he himself has declared in a long interview with The Economist, is tactical: here and now, the enemy is socialism and it must be stopped and made to retreat.
Within this doctrinal framework, Milei defends the right of each individual to live in accordance with their values, to pursue the goals they deem appropriate as long as they do not violate the rights of third parties. Of course, every adult and rational individual must be responsible for his actions, accept the costs of his decisions and not attempt to transfer them to others or to the State. Therefore, except in the case of abortion, Milei rightly estimates the lack of a unanimous position among liberals on that issue, defending total freedom of personal choice from sex change, for example, to organ trafficking. This has nothing to do with the ideology of the alt-right.
In the economic sphere, the Argentine president proposes a project and a plan to execute it, adjusted to the Argentine situation, very similar to those of Reagan or Thatcher in the eighties of the last century: on the macro level, monetary discipline to end inflation and fiscal to eliminate the public deficit by reducing State spending; At the micro level, a broad plan for market liberalization, privatization, foreign opening and tax reductions with the aim of raising growth potential and productivity. He is also not a nationalist in economics, but a free trader and a defender of immigration.
From the left it is claimed that the reform package approved in the form of a decree of Necessity and Urgency (DNU) shows Milei's authoritarian instincts. This represents a total ignorance of the Argentine Constitution. This, in its article 93, paragraph 3, authorizes the Government to use this regulation, which has the force of law from its approval by the Executive, as long as it does not affect criminal, tax, electoral issues or the party regime. The DNU has no impact on any of these issues. In addition, Parliament can repeal its validity with a majority vote against in its two chambers.
Is Milei a populist? No, but to answer that question it is essential to understand what their electoral strategy has been. On the one hand, she has clearly and emphatically exposed an orthodox liberal program of breaking with statism; On the other hand, it has appealed directly to citizens, short-circuiting the media and the corporatist elites that have dominated the Argentine public scene, revealing how they have benefited for decades from the prevailing system at the expense of the majority. In other words, she has taken liberalism out of its minority ivory tower and turned it into an attractive project of change for the average voter. Hence, the accusation of being a populist launched against a leader whose ideas, as has been shown, are at the antipodes of that doctrine; interested confusion of the background with the form.
Milei's main lesson is the ability to turn liberalism into a winning platform and who must take note of this is not the alternative right, whose doctrine does not coincide, except in anti-socialism, with that of the Argentine leader, but the classic center-right , which has abandoned its liberal hallmarks and is not capable of articulating an alternative to the prevailing collectivism.
