Fundamentalists or refoundationalists tend to surround themselves with a small circle that needs to believe strictly in something like a religion. As is known, religions are not matters of opinion for the members of a creed, but rather they are truths revealed through prophets who express the divine word. No gray areas allowed: something is a sin or it is not. In this framework, respect for the higher will does not admit indiscipline. Milei is managed within this conceptual framework.
When a project does not have an originally political matrix, it usually happens that ambiguous behavior is not allowed. The natural consequence is the “discipline or betrayal” cleavage, since these believing environments tend to be naturally distrustful of other people’s figures and ideas. For this reason, LLA was not conceived as a space for free debate, but as a creed to which one must subscribe without question.
Nor is it strange that everything revolves around an endogamous environment, which seeks to maintain the unity of the tribe through its homogeneity. Ultimately, the purity of the group is key to its survival.
Usually, those who do not originally come from politics find it difficult to assimilate its codes, which leads to distrust as a system of permanent relationships with others. This sometimes promotes paranoid attitudes and conspiratorial speculations. That is why self-protection is essential.
This is not only an element that we see in the Milei project – aggravated by its non-political origin – but it could also be observed in different phases of Kirchnerism, especially when he came to power in 2003: everything that was not known, was seen. as a threat.
A common occurrence is that a group’s value systems result in a strategic justification. It would be something like “not only do we believe it, but it is also the best in practical terms.” In the end, strict discipline avoids spending time on a task about which Perón wrote a book: driving.
*Carlos Fara is a consultant and analyst.
by Carlos Fara
