If you take to the letter what you say in the furibunda harangues that you love to pronounce, Javier Milei is an extraordinarily ambitious man who believes herself of historical dimensions. In addition to making the entire world a libertarian paradise without parasites of the caste, Puritan sectarians Woke, disgusting mandrels or journalists idem, aspires to completely change Argentina to lead the great transformation that is supposed to star in.
And Karina Milei, “the boss”? Judging by the intrigues between scenes that the lady lends itself, it is much more pragmatic than her brother who does not like to go down to earth and intervene in matters that seem insignificant. What the general secretary of the Presidency and de facto number of the National Government wants is to take advantage of the power that Javier has accumulated to build a personalist political movement without the metaphysical or ideological details of what he is doing too much.
The two summary projects are intimately related but are not identical. In truth, they could be incompatible. To achieve the economic and cultural goals that Milei has proposed, it would be convenient to have the determined support of the many who, in general terms, understand that Argentina will need to leave behind the corporatist order as soon as possible, of ecclesiastical and pre-capitalistic roots that are represented by Peronism and related currents of radical origin, but that for various reasons they do not want to be militants of freedom. However, for Karina ideas are the least; In his opinion, we must subordinate absolutely everything to personal loyalty, which is why he is resolved to eliminate Mauricio Macri from the board. From his point of view, there is no place in the national political firmament for two or three suns, by cloudy that were the minors. The primus inter pairs seems an aberration.
He who Karina Milei thinks so can be understood. The same as so many others, it gives a discounted that Argentina is a “hyper -presidential” country, that is, verticalist, caudillista, of monarchical instincts, which tends to feel lost when power spreads among many individuals. It was for this reason that, a couple of years ago, the majority, which had previously backed with enthusiasm similar to Juan Domingo Perón, Carlos Menem and Cristina Kirchner, chose to replace the caste, that is, the ruling class as a whole, by a single person who would have to improvise his own game on the march.
As innovative, in order not to say revolutionaries, that in the Argentine context the socioeconomic proposals of the libertarian, the political notions of the main strategists of freedom progress, Karina and Santiago Caputo, could hardly be more traditionalist. What this bad avenue wants is that Milei emulates Perón that, with the help of ideas that were in vogue when he began his spectacular public career, he created around his movement that would dominate Argentina for decades and that, despite his capital contribution to the prolonged decline of the country, he continues to deeply influence the thought of the bulk of its inhabitants. Although those determined to get the most out of Milei’s popularity have chosen an ideology that is strikingly different from that of the Peronist leaders who preceded him, the way they operate resembles that of those who served as a consiglieri.
From the point of view of the inclined to privilege the economic project of Milei, the libertarian assault on the Buenos Aires bastion of the macristas ordered by Karina lacks logic. Why divide the electorate who is in favor of the sharp measures that the Government has taken in its effort, which until now has been quite successful, for cureing the country of inflationary disease that has caused so many ills caused and providing it with the financial structures that it will require to enjoy a prolonged stage of vigorous growth? For purely political reasons, those determined to prevent former President Macri to play a significant role in the new order will say that they are not fully worried about the risk that, thanks to what they are saying and doing in the Federal Capital, they lose in the province of Buenos Aires where Peronism, entrenched as it is in the most ruined districts of the Conurbano, remains very strong.
If the libertarians of colliding against the macristas in the city of Buenos Aires have refrained, the possibility – better said, the probability – that Leandro Santoro, a candidate who, perhaps unjustly, many qualify as a Kirchnerist, first leave the race between the 17 heads of the list, would have been scarce, but even when it would only be a matter of a triumph limited in legislative elections of limited importance, no one ignores that no one ignores It would have an impact on not merely local public opinion but also international.
After all, a reason why many foreign investors are reluctant to try their luck in Argentina despite feeling properly impressed by what has already been dismantle Such fears may be exaggerated and that the population has already reconciled with fiscal rigor to understand that it is the only sensible alternative but, in view of the unfortunate trajectory of the country in economic matters, it is undeniable that they are rational.
Needless to say, the libertarians who respond to Karina are not the only ones responsible for the Desopgay of Buenos Aires political imparole. He also contributed former presidential Horacio Rodríguez Larreta who has focused on criticizing the management of Jorge Macri that, he insists, has not done enough to keep the public space clean. According to the most recent surveys, the former mayor will deprive the macrista Silvia Lospenato of almost ten percent of the votes that he would otherwise receive. Be that as it may, it is not that the Buenos Aires have convinced themselves that a variant of Peronism would be preferable to liberalism attributed to the PRO, but that many have the right to feel confused before the proliferation of lists.
By imputing to Karina the growing gap that separated him from Milei, the founder of PRO violated an unwritten rule according to which it must be treated with extreme delicacy because, since childhood, the president depends psychologically on her. In view of the political role it fulfills, the one that many would prefer to minimize their influence is somewhat strange. It is also that Milei has been fixed to acquire the reputation of being extraordinarily firm when it is a matter of handling the economy but of being so weak that, without the constant support of her sister, at any time she could lose the stirrups. Its function, then, is to contain it.
It has not been very successful. Of all the leaders of the world, Milei is the most prone to cover of soecious insults who, for any reason, in their opinion deserve their disapproval. In this area, not even the Castro, who call their enemies “worms”, or the Peronists who feel alarmed since they see “gorillas” in the neighborhood, can match it.
Does Milei benefit the own coprolalia of those who suffer from Tourette syndrome, which is one of its most striking characteristics? At most, it helps it stand out in the most foul areas of cyberspace where, according to those who frequent them, it has a host of young supporters, but it is expected that those who celebrate their eschatological allusions to mandriles and thus for the style constitute a very reduced minority. Far from allowing him to get counted with the electorate’s stripes that he will have to conquer so that his project is consolidated, he will only serve to provide pretexts to oppose him.
Although from time to time Milei is tempted with the Kirchnerists, the favorite whites of their verbal darts remain journalists who, although they applaud what he is doing in the economic front, treat it as if it were a common mortal, which the most fanatized fans of the president take for a crime against Majesty. It is what their friends from the digital world think that they would like to see them imprisoned, or worse, such evildoers, while the Minister of Economy, Luis Caputo, comforts himself with the idea that professional journalism “tends to disappear.” Caputo is not the first to dream of the death of a modality that dates back to the 18th century. For years, in the United States, Donald Trump’s followers gloated from the difficulties faced by the most prestigious graphic media that have been deprived of the Internet of income from advertising and readers by the downturn of the educational level of an increasing part of the population. However, it is assumed that there will always be a minority that will continue to depend on services that only journalists will be able to provide them because they want to stay well informed and do not feel scared by those who question the behavior and motives of the rulers on duty.
