World News

To be fair, I think the words liberal, left and capitalism all have different meanings to different groups. And sometimes I think they subtly change meanings while someone is making a single logical point.

What do you mean specifically here?

That a lot of political groups that align themselves as liberals are also in favour of free trade? It reads as if you are also characterising capitalism as a negative so I'm presuming it's something like enabling the rich and powerful to maximise profits with minimal oversight. Since you are only relating capitalism to liberals I think you're referring to the far-right rhetoric that they will stop this "capitalism" but ignoring that most traditional political groups thought of as conservative are also pro free trade, and ignoring that these far-right groups haven't (I would argue) taken any/many actions that target stoping this "capitalism" (for example Trumps tariffs are practically for demanding concessions from other countries and you can see this because their unstable values hurt local industries but help pushing for demands).

Or maybe you simply mean that the left as you use the label is focused on civil liberties without being tied to systems of economics?

I'm sure you have plenty to say about what I wrote but can you lead with how I was wrong with my assumptions about what you meant?

No worries. I edited my reply to put both words on the same sentence to help if that was the issue.

I did wonder about this a bit though. He is often framed in media as far right but unlike Trump or Farage he doesn't seem to be so loud with anti-immigrant statements in the same sort of demonising way. Eventually I found this and I'm curious how wrong or right you think it is:

https://www.swp-berlin.org/10.18449/2024C37/

Here's some (biased) quotes that I think make it seem like the far right label is reasonable but I'm sill pretty ignorant myself (and sorry that the vocabulary is different, it was a pain for me so I'm guessing it's not perfect for you):

Milei cultivates a populist political style and espouses a libertarian-authoritarian ideology that is on the far right of the national political spectrum. His success as a politician can be attributed to a mix of national and international factors: He is both a product of the supply and demand within his country’s political arena and a part of the rising global radical right.

Milei is a proponent of anarcho-capitalism, which was founded in the 1950s in the U.S. by Murray Rothbard. In the early 1990s, Rothbard argued that libertarian ideas needed an active and aggressive strategy to gain majority support in the U.S. and be politically viable. He, therefore, advocated right-wing populism, the programmatic core of which is at the heart of Milei’s dis­course. Rothbard proposed an “outreach strategy” in which libertarians would ally themselves with paleoconservatives and traditionalists while making certain ideo­logical compromises, such as adopting a socially conservative agenda – an ideological shift that is visible in Milei’s discourse development. According to Rothbard, this new broad right-wing populist movement should be led by a charismatic presidential candidate whom all right-wing anti-estab­lish­ment forces would enthusiastically support.

In typical populist style, Milei blames “the caste”, as he calls the political elite, for all of Argentina’s ills, describing its mem­bers are “parasites” that feed off the coun­try’s wealth. He claims to despise politics, regarding it as a “dirty business”. Milei does not acknowledge the factual inequality among people due to the double contingency of social origin and the personal talent con­ditioned by it. Instead, he assumes a theo­retical equality of origin, which should not be confused with equality of value. Thus, Milei views political and legal systems not as enabling frameworks that include equali­sation mechanisms such as rules to prevent oligopolies, but merely as constraints on the free development of individuals and the market. In this regard, he sees redistribution as a source of injustice. Consequently, he categorically rejects approaches to af­firma­tive action or positive discrimination, the protection of minorities and social policy.

Milei’s ultra-liberal stance, evident in his advocacy for allowing the sale of one’s own organs under market conditions (“My first property is my body; why shouldn’t I be able to dispose of it?”), quickly reaches its limits when it comes to the self-deter­mina­tion of pregnant individuals. Together with his vice-president, Victoria Villarruel, he campaigns for the repeal of the legalisation of abortion approved by Congress in 2020. Milei considers abortion to be “murder between relatives”, which should be subject to particularly severe punishment.

Milei believes that the lack of gender equality is an invention of the left

Milei tends to relativise the crimes committed by the Argentine military dictatorship (1976–1983). He admits that there were excesses in the “war against subversion”; however, he denies the systematic nature of the human rights violations committed (kidnappings, torture, assassinations, and disappearances)

But Milei’s mission is backward-looking. According to the 2023 electoral programme, the declared aim of his LLA alliance is to use liberal policies to return Argentina to the economically, politically, culturally and socially prosperous country it was supposedly (as the first world power) at the begin­ning of the 20th century – a time, inciden­tally, when universal and secret suffrage did not yet exist. This topos of a glorified past, which is reminiscent of the “Make America Great Again” sentiment, is central to Milei’s rhetoric and typically characterises the radical right