The election of Javier Milei and the challenges of a poor Argentina

With Matheus de Oliveira Pereira, State University of Sao Paulo (Unesp)

In December 2001, Argentina experienced one of the most dramatic moments in its history. The collapse of convertibility – the monetary stabilization plan that established parity between the dollar and the peso – brought tens of thousands of people to the streets to protest the government’s confiscation of their money.playpen“.

In an already historic moment, then President Fernando de la Rúa left Casa Rosada in a helicopter after his resignation, to the disbelief of the protesters who occupied the Plaza de Mayo.

Almost 22 years later, the population of Argentina seems to have finally found a figure that could effectively express “let them all go” slogan that marked that December.

Javier Milei, far-right economist and founder of the party La Libertad Avanza (LLA), was elected president of Argentina defeating Peronist Sergio Massa in the second round held last Sunday.

The lead of more than ten points between Miley and Massa once again called into question the credibility of pollsters who had predicted a tight race with narrow margins. However, there were signs that this image was wrong from the first round. In the first round of voting in Octoberthe sum of the votes given to Milei and Patrícia Bullrich already exceeded Massa’s vote by around 15%.

Victory in 20 of the country’s 23 provinces

In the end, Milei managed to keep over 80% of Bullrich’s votes and widened his electoral base by more than 324,000 votes compared to the performance of the right in the first round. The result was a resounding victory, with Milei defeating Masha in 20 of the country’s 23 provinces, as well as the federal capital, Buenos Aires. In traditional anti-Peronist strongholds such as Mendoza, the margin was more than 40%, but Millay won in five of the eight provinces currently ruled by Peronism.

Understanding the reasons behind this situation is an effort that will take some years. In a preliminary analysis, the results can be read as the expected end of an informal election cycle in which a society is punished by decade of economic stagnation and various failed stabilization plans decided to punish traditional political forces. In other words, faced with the rejection of familiar types, the unknown was embraced.

The impressive thing is that this dissatisfaction found its main representative Javier Miley. Millay is an aggressive figure, clearly unprepared, without solid social foundations, and who has become known more for idiosyncrasies than for championing a project or course in politics.

Extreme and furious campaign

Miley ran a campaign in his image and likeness: historic, extreme and angry, symbolized by the chainsaw with which he sought – metaphorically, one hopes – to destroy “caste”, the expression he used to refer to its politicians country. To this, he added half a dozen slogans (“dollarization,” “liberty,” “end of the Central Bank”), for which little explanation was given, and created the successful campaign that took him to the Casa Rosada.

Understanding this phenomenon requires examining the transformations underway in Argentine society, ranging from the changes brought about by communication in the Internet age to the advancement of job insecurity and the marginalization of large segments of the population from markets and official state protection networks.

In this sense, it must be recognized that Milei has shown a greater ability to read the current situation than his opponents. He understood that fatigue with government would not be represented in incremental formulas, as suggested by Coalition Together for Changeand made room to accept a shock treatment proposal.

From this point of view, the proposal to dollarize the economy it turned out to be a smart electoral move, winning over younger voters who don’t remember the 1990s crash and feel the immediate impact of a stagnant economy as soon as they enter the job market.

While it is necessary to broaden the effort to understand the roots of this effect, it is also necessary to consider its implications going forward.

“Change must be drastic, without middle ground”

Milei himself seems aware that his agenda is less feasible than he made it out to be during the campaign. During his victory speech, Millay made no mention of dollarization or abolishing the Central Bank, but made it clear that the path he intends to take is one of shock therapy. He stated: “The changes we need are drastic. There is no room for gradualism, there is no room for a middle ground.”

Implementing this shock agenda represents a politically very complex undertaking. Passing laws and projects that require a qualified majority will require agreements with sectors Peronism, but the challenge doesn’t end there. The adoption of shock therapy tends to produce very costly effects in terms of employment and income, which could unleash waves of protest that could jeopardize the country’s already troubled governance.

In this context, Milei’s political viability will depend on building a network of support that goes beyond votes in the House and Senate and making a name for himself on the streets.

Will Milei hold back?

To what extent Milei will be able to make these joints without losing his anti-establishment legitimacy is unknown.

Another open question, and potentially a more serious one, concerns the impact of the Millay presidency on Argentina’s democratic institutions. At the moment there seems to be an expectation in the country’s traditional circles that the president-elect will be moderate, restrained by the weight of office, and that his aggressive tone is more a candidate’s speech than an expression of temperament.

However, one of the lessons to be learned from the experiences of Donald Trump and Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil is that expectations of moderation are thwarted by far-right politicians. The notion that the Republican Party or the armed forces would contain Trump and Bolsonaro, respectively, was not only wrong, but what we saw was a radicalization of these actors, who mostly adhered to the authoritarian designs of their leaders.

Authoritarian DNA

To deny the authoritarian DNA of Milei’s work, as the traditional Argentinian right has done, is to close one’s eyes to the obvious in order to avoid confronting one’s own contradictions. At the campaign committee, posters with Miley’s face were accompanied by the phrase “the only solution”.

Now, if one person claims to be the only solution to the country’s problems, everyone who opposes that solution automatically becomes part of the problem.

How Argentina’s new president intends to deal with this scenario remains to be seen, but the clues offered by Milei and Argentina’s history suggest that the vibrant capacity for mobilization that distinguishes Argentine society may be more necessary than never.

About the Author:

Matheus de Oliveira PereiraResearcher at INCT – INEU and GEDES, State University of Sao Paulo (Unesp)

This article is republished from The conversation with a Creative Commons license. Read it original article.