To stay in shape, an elite athlete needs to measure himself against rivals who are at his level. If you don’t find them, it won’t take long for you to weaken. The same goes for governments. Unless they face a strong opposition with clear ideas that is able to offer a viable alternative to the ruling party, their leaders will end up obsessed by the internal conflicts of their group.
That’s what’s happening here. Without being forced to worry too much about the maneuvers of the different Peronist, Macrista, radical or leftist factions that make up an opposition still demoralized by the results of last year’s legislative elections, the government headed by Javier Milei runs the risk of falling victim to its own political successes.
As things stand, Milei and her sister Karina feel free to do whatever they want. It is to be expected, therefore, that the government will continue to approve unusual developments such as the Official Response Office, a libertarian Inquisition created to punish the disseminators of heretical ideas and news. It would not be surprising if in the coming months other equally eccentric initiatives appear that, perhaps, will serve to distract people’s attention from the disappointing performance of the economy that, to the president’s frustration, continues to refuse to reactivate.
For Milei, the fact that inflation has turned out to be a much tougher nut to crack than the monetarists he worships believed is a very big problem. Judging by the experience of countries like Israel and Chile, it will take years before the country finally frees itself from the scourge that has contributed so much to its impoverishment, but it would seem that Milei, encouraged by what happened in the first year of his administration, became convinced that he could do so in a strikingly shorter period of time.
The behavior of the dollar – or rather, the peso – and the lethargy of the “productive apparatus” also cause concern. The country may not face a prolonged period of “stagflation” as certain pessimists warn, but there are many people convinced that this is a possibility and that it entails the risk that, as time goes by, the majority will lose faith in the libertarian gospel and begin to demand changes now.
None of that is surprising. Restructuring an economy as ancient as Argentina’s so that it can prosper in the ultra-competitive world of tomorrow will take at least twenty years of hard work on the part of those capable of contributing something positive. Will national entrepreneurs be in a position to do so if all protectionist barriers and the products of an educational system that is widely agreed to be scandalously deficient fall? It would not be entirely surprising if, if the economic boom that Milei dreams of materializes, thousands of technicians from other parts of the world would have to come to fulfill functions that the local workforce would be incapable of performing.
In its own way, the corporatist “model” supported by generations of politicians was successful in ensuring an environment in which even those reluctant to adapt to modern “work culture” could survive, which is why, despite a series of volcanic crises, it persisted until, finally, the triumvirate of Cristina, Alberto and Sergio put it on the brink of a bottomless abyss. Naturally, trade unionists and others who benefited oppose the mileist attempt to replace the politicized officials who continue to administer it with the impersonal market.
The fundamental difference between capitalism based on the freedom of the individual that Milei claims with overwhelming enthusiasm and all the alternatives is that in these the material and therefore social destiny of each person depends on decisions made by politicians, that is, by members of “the caste” and their subordinates. In many places, including New York and other parts of the United States, popular contempt for the local “caste” has not prevented substantial sectors of the middle class from wanting politicians, advised by progressive militants, to manage virtually all economic variables, but in Argentina, many rebels against the status quo have opted for the libertarian version of capitalism.
In any case, since for now at least the majority seems to be in favor of the “course” that Milei has taken, there are many politicians who understand that it would be better for them to act as traveling companions of the messianic guide, which, as it could not be otherwise, is widening the cracks in all the non-official parties. In certain cases due to ideological affinity and in others because they are accustomed to getting closer to the power in power, many adrift politicians are approaching and even joining La Libertad Avanza, which bothers the early milleistas who are trying to keep them at bay.
Although to be successful Milei would have to transform what just three years ago was a very minority sect into an authentic mass movement by incorporating cadres trained in organizations united around principles very different from their own, those who would prefer that La Libertad Avanza continue to be a family business dominated by initiates do not hide the contempt they feel for those recently converted to the cause.
Likewise, there are those who are relocating with the purpose of taking advantage of the changes they see coming without, however, wanting to join the government forces. At most, they are willing to give them critical support. This is what the Peronist governors of provinces where mining or oil wealth abounds are doing; They are preparing to welcome multinational corporations in the hope that they will invest lots of money in ambitious projects of the kind that have always alarmed environmentalists and nationalists who would prefer that underground resources remain where they are.
For such provincial leaders, the announcement that a consortium of Australian and Canadian mining companies could be about to invest up to $18 billion in a binational project in the Cordillera shared by Argentina and Chile is just a preview of what they would like to see happen in their part of the world. If, as they hope, they have access to a multitude of boxes full of funds, it will be much easier for them to preserve the “feudal” systems that seem natural to them.
To seduce traditional liberals, Milei has been able to remind them that his ideology is very similar to that preached, with less truculence, by Mauricio Macri. To ingratiate himself with the Peronists, Milei wants them to overlook his firm adherence to ultra-liberal, not to say gorilla, concepts and take note of his personal behavior which, needless to say, has very little in common with that considered typical of those who have always considered themselves liberal. Although it would seem that Milei’s efforts to blend in with her peers have not worked very well in the Buenos Aires suburbs, where the majority continues to support characters who represent ways of thinking that deposited her in the structural misery in which she is trapped, in the rest of the country the image of an authentic outsider that the anarcho-capitalist has carved out for herself is helping her to relate to those who have become distrustful of politicians of Buenos Aires origin.
Milei is a hybrid. Although the ideas he defends so passionately are of extremely respectable academic origin, he likes to behave like a hooligan; It is a combination that carries the risk that he will end up so offending those who would otherwise sympathize with his political-economic project that they will oppose him and that he will deserve the hatred of others for proposing structural changes that can only harm them. All in all, although there is no doubt that his ruffianesque and often authoritarian behavior has earned him the antipathy of some social groups and that the economic policy symbolized by the chainsaw has prevented him from approaching the poorest inhabitants of the Province of Buenos Aires, Milei and those around him take for granted that his lack of decorum helps him relate emotionally with young people who, unlike their parents, want to break with Peronism.
Milei presents himself as the antidote to the political traditions that impoverished Argentina, but he frequently gives the impression of believing that, because his objectives are so splendid, he should not worry about trifles such as institutional quality. He seems to assume that shrinking the State would serve to eliminate corruption, which is why he is not concerned that, according to Transparency International, the country has begun to fall again in the ranking table that it disseminates, returning to the humiliating places it occupied in the times of Cristina and Alberto Fernández. This is one reason why, despite the drastic reforms attempted by the government, the massive investments that, given Milei’s seemingly realistic expectations, should already be transforming the national economic landscape have barely begun to arrive.
