THE AMERICAS | ADVOCACY & POLICY
OpEd: Javier Milei, Argentina’s Populist President and the Hypocrisy of Neo-Conservatism
WORDS BY JOSHUA EDWICKER | EDWICKER@PROXYBYIWI.COM | 10 FEBRUARY 2024
Modern Populism
Javier Milei is emblematic of a type of politics which has become commonplace since 2016. He shouts, he swears and curses those who stand against him. Milei embodies the spirit of those who vote for him. Milei symbolises the opposition to a system which has genuinely disenchanted and disadvantaged millions of Argentines. Much like President Trump and Prime Minister Johnson, the mistake of mainstream media is to underestimate the intelligence and cynicism of these populist men. Such a mistake is dangerous for our rights and our democracies.
Sporting an untidy mess of hair reminiscent of a bird’s nest appears to help one’s electoral chances in post-2016 politics. But where Trump has his billions and his own distorted version of the American Dream, and Johnson has his clumsy and foolish yet charming ‘Boris’ demeanour, Milei has his chainsaw and three cloned dogs who act as his political advisors. President Milei’s campaign was largely characterised by bemoaning that the “state is an enemy, as are the politicians who live off it”. Milei is a classical libertarian, bordering on the precipice of anarcho-capitalism, living in apparent abject terror of the tyranny of the state and its dastardly regulations.
Chainsaw Politics
Milei often campaigned with a chainsaw, promising to cut up the Argentine social welfare state, which, as he explained, had created: “That aberration called social justice which is unjust because it implies unequal treatment in the face of the law.”
This is a problematic political position in a country where the World Bank estimates 40% live in poverty. Milei has promised to drastically reduce Government spending, a move which will undoubtedly affect the most vulnerable in Argentine society. Within an anarcho-capitalist world perspective, one’s economic misfortune is one’s own to manage, and the social contract between citizen and state does not extend to economic protection. Milei’s criticism of the existing social framework of Argentina, combined with his use of violent and hateful rhetoric, is particularly worrying considering Argentina’s history as a military dictatorship.
Much like ousted Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, Milei has made a point of underplaying the violence and injustice exacted by the military dictatorships of each country. Whilst campaigning, Milei promised to eradicate Argentina’s Ministry of Justice and Human Rights, arguing that the number of Argentines killed by the military junta was exaggerated. This is a tragic betrayal of the truth and of those victims of the junta, which ruled for the six years 1976–1982, killing and torturing thousands in what was known as ‘The Dirty War’.
A country with as much inequality, destitution, and historic violence as Argentina, is especially vulnerable to a man like Milei, who promises change but will worsen the symptoms of that which he promises to heal.
Hypocrisy and incoherence
Milei on Abortion: “When you construct on the basis of an incorrect moral principle, the result is filth. How can being able to kill other human beings be a right gained? As a liberal, I believe in the unrestricted right to life based on the defence of life, liberty and property. I defend life, biology says that life begins with conception,”
Despite arguing for the marketisation of organs as “My first property is my body” and the complete removal of the state from the economic system, Milei does take his anarchistic or neo-liberal philosophies to their logical conclusion when it comes to abortion. Instead, he plays to the strong evangelical base within South American polity, and is in favour of banning a women’s right to abortion.
In other words, Milei’s political ideology is thus; the state has no right to interfere in any part of an individual’s life, except when that person is a woman seeking an abortion. Not only is this incoherent from a political theory standpoint, but it symbolises the thinly veiled misogyny within modern populism. Populism, in its rejection of progress in social justice, appears set on a return to male chauvinism illustrated by Trump’s infamous ‘Grab them by the pussy’, Bolsonaro’s “I wouldn’t rape you because you’re not worthy of it”, and Orban’s complaint that “education is becoming too feminine”.
Misogyny is a valued element of modern populism. Just as populists use xenophobic fears of immigration to garner public support, there is an increasing use of misogynistic rhetoric to convince men and women who are often poor and uneducated, that their socio-economic problems are caused by the undocumented, rather than by their economic exploitation at the hands of their own government. Immigrants who risk death by crossing the English Channel, destitute pregnant teenagers who can’t afford a child and is too afraid to tell her parents but hopes to one day go to university – characterising these individuals as “other”, and signalling to bigoted government supporters that their circumstances are the fault of those who already experience discrimination and prejudice is a callous and pernicious way to operate politically.
Misogyny is dangerous. Attacks on women who receive abortions is dangerous. Rhetoric which requires a politician to utilise a chainsaw is dangerous.