Anti-abortion and libertarian, Milei is a paradox

Javier Gerardo Milei, an outsider in national politics, was elected president of Argentina in a runoff on Sunday (19-11-2023). He defeated the official candidate, Sergio Tomas Massa, current Minister of Economy, a true political insider. Commotion and consternation in the world of politics and economics, with the popular vote demonstrating nausea and weariness with a ruling class that has failed in its public management, but has nurtured a mass of officials and militants, in some cases billionaires, in the face of the impoverishment of the majority of the Argentine population.

Javier Gerardo Milei is an economist by profession, who first entered the world of Argentine politics two years ago, managing to be elected national deputy with an emerging and tiny political force, which he called 'La Libertad Avanza'.

Based on the theories developed by, among others, Murray N. Rothbard and Hans-Herman Hoppe, he embarked on this adventure by preaching and promoting anarcho-capitalism, or libertarian anarchism, as a solution to the structural problems of the Argentine economy. That is, by postulating the primacy or absolute sovereignty of the individual, exercised through private property and the free market, against the political sovereignty of the state, which he claims to minimise, so that it is only concerned with the protection of individual private property and non-aggression on the latter, through the police, military and justice forces. This is what is known as minarchism.

Within this conceptual framework, it postulates market freedom as the natural constitutive axis of the social and economic life of society, in the belief that the market alone generates a natural order of human relations. This is why it is clearly anti-Marxist and anti-socialist. Ultimately, the capitalism it proclaims is the liberal capitalism of the 19th century that Pope Leo XIII criticised in the encyclical Rerum Novarum (1891), which initiated the systemisation of the Social Doctrine of the Church in the 20th century.

Capitalism that was also condemned by Pope Pius XI in his encyclical Quadragesimo anno (1931), for its economic derivations that installed an "enormous and tyrannical economic power in the hands of a few", i.e. a ferocious and brutal concentration of international finance and economics.

The president-elect not only ignores these critical contributions of Christian Social Teaching to liberal capitalism, he disqualifies them by describing Social Justice as an 'aberration'. In this sense, not only should the state not intervene in social and economic affairs, but neither should the Church and its social doctrine.

Add to this the brutal disqualification that Milei made a few years ago of Pope Francis, calling him "the representative of the evil one on earth, occupying the throne of the house of God", because he "pushes communism with all the disasters it has caused and this goes against the Holy Scriptures". And a few months ago, in an interview with the US journalist Tucker Carlson (15-09-2013), he also made a criticism of the pontiff, this time more toned down: 'The pope plays politics, he has a strong political interference', showing 'great affinity with dictators like Fidel Castro or Nicolás Maduro', putting himself 'on the side of bloodthirsty dictatorships'. And he concluded by stating that [the Pope] 'regards social justice as central', which [for Milei] 'is very complicated'.

Such a clear and directly discrediting position of Bergoglio provoked a reaction from the priests closest and most akin to the pontiff, known as the 'curas villeros', endorsed by the archbishop of Buenos Aires, Monsignor Jorge Ignacio García Cueva, who celebrated a Mass of reparation in a porteña church on 5 September, effectively supporting the presidential candidacy of the then government candidate.

Support that did not benefit Sergio Tomás Massa at all, given the election result, which shows the little or scarce public political weight that the Argentine Church has today, embalmed in the progressive political scheme promoted by Bergoglio and its increasingly explicit political subordination to the Council for Inclusive Capitalism (Rothschild), the 2030 Agenda (UN-World Economic Forum) and the radical social-democratic policies of the Soros clan.

Subordination that has not only removed the defence of human life from conception and the condemnation of global prenatal genocide from the Holy See's official public agenda, but has also promoted and fostered clearly abortionist figures and personalities placed in important Holy See positions.

Surprisingly and paradoxically, the libertarian president-elect has been a clear and steadfast defender of human life from conception, both in 2018 - when the attempt to legalise abortion in Argentina (Mauricio Macri's government) was foiled - and in 2020 - when it was legalised (current Kirchnerist social democratic government).

This pro-life stance was confirmed in the above-mentioned interview with journalist Tucker Carlson, to whom he reiterated that 'abortion is murder aggravated by the bond', because 'liberalism is the unlimited respect for the life of one's neighbour based on non-aggression and the defence of the right to life and liberty'.

One of the fundamental ideas is to defend the right to life. There is also an explanation from the point of view of science: 'Life begins with fertilisation', because 'a new evolving being with a different DNA is generated. It is true that the woman has rights over her body, but that child is not her body. The child is not her body. Abortion is therefore murder aggravated by the bond and by a disparity of strength'.
Add to this the clear and explicit adherence to Judaism and the study of the Torah that Javier Milei has shown in recent months, linking up with prominent leaders of international Jewish rabbinism.

The emergence of a true outsider of mainstream politics and his dizzying rise over the course of four years, defeating a political force that relied on a very strong party structure and control of the large national state coffers and several provinces, shows in an undeniable and unquestionable way the deterioration and decline of a political leadership which has been very skilful and able to increase its personal fortune and wealth, while the vast majority of the Argentine people have seen their quality of life dramatically decrease, in the midst of an inflationary process that the current government has neither been able nor willing to resolve.

Between the evil known and the good to be known, the Argentine people have decided to show their weariness towards a leadership that is incapable and inept, but voracious with public resources for its own benefit, by choosing the candidate with no experience in government, accompanied by clearly ultra-liberal characters with little or no social sensitivity.    
God only knows where this political process that has been started in Argentina will go.