What Javier Milei Could Teach Democrats and Republicans About Capitalism
His speech in Davos challenged the growing worldwide trend of increased government involvement in economic affairs.

In a thrilling address at the World Economic Forum, Javier Milei, President of Argentina, presented a robust defense of capitalism and a critical examination of all forms of collectivism. His speech, rich in historical context and economic analysis, offers some vital lessons that are particularly relevant for today's globalized economy. Sadly, these lessons have long been ignored by American politicians on the right and left, whether in Washington or on the campaign trail.
Milei began with a stark warning about the dangers of collectivist policies based on Argentina's own, sometimes sad, history. Once a beacon of prosperity under a capitalist framework, Argentina's shift toward collectivism over the past century caused its prosperity to plummet from a leading global position to a much lower rank. Its story illustrates how losing sight of free market principles can result in economic stagnation or even absolute poverty.
This point is crucial. Milei reminds us that no matter how noble the intentions are behind collectivist policies, whether it's fighting climate change, obtaining justice for all, or enhancing national security—and whether they are pushed, as Milei says, by "communist, fascist, socialist, social democrats, national socialists, Christian democrats, neo-Keynesians, progressives, populists, nationalists, or globalists"—attempting to solve problems in this way harms the very people who are meant to be helped.
Now, readers may think this historical lesson is irrelevant for the United States. After all, Argentina has been an economic basket case, and America in 2024 is still one of the wealthiest nations in the world. Anyone who has taken, as I have, the naturalization test also knows that the expected answer to "what is the economic system of the United States?" is "free market." That one made me smile.
Unfortunately, Milei's warning is relevant to us. While much of our economy remains relatively free, every part of it is subjected to an increasingly intrusive regulatory regime and ineffective, burdensome, and unfair tax code. Furthermore, while Democrats and Republicans fight constantly, their economic policies are strikingly, similarly, and increasingly collectivist.
Both parties have recently become so populist that they could justly be described as modern Peronists who believe that politicians, better than people operating in a free market, can direct investment and determine which industries should succeed and which should fail. It's no exaggeration to say that America has traveled a significant distance down the "road to serfdom" that Milei warns about.
Milei, an economist by training, doesn't only criticize collectivism; he offers a compelling, positive case for capitalism. By tracing global economic history, he highlights a pivotal moment: the advent of capitalism and the Industrial Revolution. This period marked a departure from centuries of economic stagnation, ushering in unprecedented growth in global per capita gross domestic product (GDP) and a significant reduction in poverty.
The data offered by Milei is striking. The transformation from a near-zero growth world to a rapid economic expansion under capitalism testifies not just to the free market's efficiency but to its capacity to subsequently improve people's lives on a massive scale. The fact that poverty and inequality still exist makes Milei's insights more pertinent, not less. They suggest that the path lies not in abandoning capitalism but in more effectively harnessing its immense potential.
Even better: Economic growth isn't just an engine of wealth production but also of peace and tolerance. More of that, please.
Milei's perspective challenges the growing worldwide trend of increased government involvement in economic affairs. He advocates for limited government intervention, where economic freedom, respect for private property, and market mechanisms are paramount. It's a reminder that the road to prosperity is paved with policies that empower individuals and businesses alike, fostering an environment in which innovation, entrepreneurship, and opportunities for all kinds of people thrive.
Better yet, Milei ended his memorable speech with a poignant "Long live freedom, dammit." It's a rallying cry for our times, a reminder of the value of liberty, and a call to defend it against encroaching forces. As we navigate the complexities of the 21st century, his words serve as a beacon, guiding us towards a future where freedom is not just cherished in the abstract but actively protected and nurtured in practice.
Don't think of Javier Milei's address in Davos as a historical analysis or economic lecture; it's a call to action. Let's reevaluate our approach to economic policy, remember and recognize the proven strengths of capitalism, and be wary of the inescapable pitfalls and proven failures of collectivism. Embracing economic freedom while ensuring responsible governance is surely the key to sustainable prosperity and continued global progress.
COPYRIGHT 2024 CREATORS.COM.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Boaf Sidez!
BOAF Ssiiiiidddeeeeessss
I don't get it.
For real?
boaf - https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=boaf
"A 6 -8 inch poop. After someone makes a boaf you must call one of your friends to inform them of this. a double boaf is any poop that is 8 inches or longer. In this rare occurrence you must take a picture of it and send it to your closest of friends.
"I have to boaf."
"Not downstairs please.""
Boaf
"An ass quefe that is excreted by a woman during anal sex, Usually used to describe a stupid, whorish, slutty girl."
Exactly...
Milei states ....
""communist, fascist, socialist, social democrats, national socialists, Christian democrats, neo-Keynesians, progressives, populists, nationalists, or globalists"
Reason comes back with Boaf Sidez... Surprised they didn't try an Especially Trump! /s
For some reason I see one parties name about twice as much as the others which ironically isn't even there.
Should we get Suderman in here to explain how the only responsible answer to a big government program like Obamacare is another big government program covering even more?
WE HAVE TO HAVE A REPLACEMENT!
Milei is not on your side, liberaltarians.
About a 90% overlap.
I definitely would vote for him despite his weirdness.
Lol, your record here shows that claim is the opposite of true. Milei's not a neocon or a corporatist.
Or a known child molester.
Both sides? There's only one side. Trump good Biden bad. Anything else is leftist.
Poor sarc
Just drunk at this point.
I was rooting for him, but it appears he is off the wagon again.
So was I, but he was too weak of a man.
^Self-projecting leftist.
Because that is how their brain operates.
While I agree with the crux of the article, I have to admit the following drew a bit of a snort:
Both parties have recently become so populist that they could justly be described...
Ummm...in case you didn't figure it out, the dude wielding the chainsaw at a campaign speech is a populist. And it gets to a point that I know the Reason staffers love to pooh-pooh. Libertarian populism is not only a viable, but probably the only viable strategy for libertarianism. Supporting free minds and free markets doesn't mean rolling over as the pets of the dominant technocratic-managerial class. That class's power, in large part, owes to its access to state power.
"Libertarian populism" is an oxymoron. Libertarianism is, if nothing else, holding liberty in the highest regard. And populism is very much prone to violating the liberty of anyone who disagrees with the mob.
And populism is very much prone to violating the liberty of anyone who disagrees with the mob.
So you're a populist.
Jeff received a list of bad things people can be and he doesn't much care how he throws those words around.
Despite the stupid Nolan Chart designation, all populism is is favoring the interests of the general public over the elite. There’s no contradiction between that and placing liberty as a central political value. Whatsoever. The entire libertarian critique is predicated on the fact that we don’t live in a state of individual liberty. And who the hell is it that you think is in a position to impose all of the infringements on liberty we labor under? Some guy working 9-5 or building a small business? I’d hope you’re not so dense as to need me to remind you of the currently viral study showing elite hostility to liberty. There’s no reason for libertarians not to take the side of the people against authoritarian elites. Of course, that’s populism.
Learn what the word “oxymoron” means before you start tossing it around. Otherwise, you just look like a moron on oxy.
This is why he's chemjeff elitist statist.
Bill, that was classic!
You left off ‘Fatfuck Pedophile Enthusiast’.
Bravo...someone will be along shortly to pick up that dropped mic.
But don't blame Nolan for the stupid labeling. It was Madox and Lilie, and/or Cato generally...and Madox and Lilie had their scholarly reason for it that Cato didn't have to run with for years. Nolan himself never took populism to be some antithesis to liberty.
In fact toward the end of his life, David Nolan described himself as libertarian and populist.
Despite the stupid Nolan Chart designation, all populism is is favoring the interests of the general public over the elite. There’s no contradiction between that and placing liberty as a central political value.
Ah yes populism, collectivizing the population by separating them into groups, us against them, despite everyone being an individual with different interests from each other. Very libertarian!
Looks to me like you're collectivizing populists there. Not very individualist of you. By your own purity test, you don't seem to make the cut.
100% correct. The People's Party, also known as the Populist Party or simply the Populists, was a **left-wing**[2] agrarian populist[3] political party in the United States
Or, for short, capitalism is far more successful than socialism.
You may quibble with the extent to which any one economy is socialist or capitalist, and by capitalism we’re not restricting ourselves to laissez-faire capitalism (and ditto socialism not being a purist all-out Marxist form). But overall, capitalism wins and it’ really is no contest.
One issue is behavioural – many people would rather earn $50,000 if their neighbour earn $40,000 than $80,000 if their neighbour earn $100,000. Socialists in practice “reward” such thinking.
many people would rather earn $50,000 if their neighbour earn $40,000 than $80,000 if their neighbour earn $100,000.
If you say so. Sounds really stupid to me.
Think of how stupid the average person is, and then consider that they are smarter than half of the population.
Much of what people call "stupid" is "makes different choices than me".
Maybe so, but much of it is also people making dumb decisions because they lack discipline and self-control. The obesity running rampant in the world is definitely a result of people making different decisions from me, but it's also a symptom of people making a lot of bad decisions that they themselves regret.
The more people I meet, the more I realize how underdeveloped and undervalued discipline is among us. It's a symptom of prosperity though.
Like being a cowardly, raging, delusional lifelong alcoholic pussy? Yeah, those are very different life choices than most of us make.
Pour Sarc.
If you say so. Sounds really stupid to me.
Yes, but it's a known result in behavioural finance, and justified in evopsych - which is admittedly not a robust discipline at this point -- in that for reproductive success relative to others, what matters is doing better than they are, not doing well in absolute terms.
for reproductive success relative to others, what matters is doing better than they are, not doing well in absolute terms
Probably on the tribal level, as well - absolute prosperity is important, but making sure you're doing better than any potential rivals is more important.
On the tribal level, the tribe that is most absolutely prosperous will also be most relatively prosperous and will, in general, prevail over those less prosperous.
Game theory experiments show that it people really do tend to think that way.
No, not really. Most people don't have time to compare themselves to their neighbors, because the Biden administration keeps screwing both of them over.
Truthfulness? You're going to need to change your name, maybe "fullofshit".
It's a well known phenomenon. Another example is to give person A $100. Tell person A to give any amount of that to person B. If person B accepts, they both keep the money. If person B refuses, neither gets the money. So, person A gives person B $1. Person B, who just got a free $1, refuses, because "it's not fair" that person A got $100 and only gave person B $1. On the other hand, if person A gives person B more like $40, person B is likely to accept.
It's just truth. It's not universal, some people do behave differently, but it's true generally.
That isn't a 'socialist' mindset. It is a mindset seen by anthropologists in every society. Exhibited in tall poppy syndrome, dog in a manger, nail that sticks out gets hammered down, Law of Jante, shunning a baseball player when they hit their first HR, the virtue of humility, etc. Yes it emphasizes the egalitarian. But the alternative is purely worship of the hierarchical since 'success' is not defined the same way by everyone.
It's not exactly socialist, no. But, it is simultaneously anti-capitalist and a primary driver of capitalism. Socialism is just reverse "keeping up with the Joneses" in action.
Slaveholding, monarchist, mystical MERCANTILISM, which is what Marx wrote against, is NOT free markets. 1873 Comstockism used the postal monopoly to ban birth control, add censorship; that is burn criticism of government and spicy pix or literature. Prohibition of substance markets has caused nearly ALL major Crashes and several wars. Argentina's Caudillo de Dios banana republican girl-bullier promised to repeal NOTHING yet demands women be reenslaved as race-suicide breeder dams. The guy is a MAGAt impersonating an anarchist.
What Javier Milei Could Teach Democrats and Republicans About Capitalism
He could also teach Veronique de Rugy and other Reason writers something about free markets, because nominally being pro-free market, in reality, they advocate self-serving, anti-free market policies just like Democrats and Republicans do. It's always "a free market for me but not for thee".
Next step: Teach DeRps how to milk a duck
We're not the ones who think a man can turn into a woman, kiddo.
JFree would probably try to milk a bull.
With his mouth and anus.
O/T: Negotiations with terrorists?, when Fetterman has more brain cells than the Jewish Senate leader, Chuck Schumer. I quipped on Schumer kneeling in Palestinian cloth in five or six months, but damn, the Democrats are absolutely shameless. Get on your fucking knees Schumer.
https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2024-01-24/nearly-all-us-senate-democrats-back-two-state-solution-for-israel-and-palestinians
What do you mean “our” approach to economic policy, Veronique? The people who are reading your op-ed already agree with you! It’s the Republicans and Democrats who need to reconsider THEIR approach to economic policy. But ultimately it is The People who should stop demanding solutions from government to things that are not actually problems. It is, ultimately, The People who should finally realize that only they are being hurt by the outcomes of the politicians promising to help them. No one has yet found a way to convince the people who we need to convince.
That’s because voters don’t create ‘solutions’ out of thin air and then vote against pols who don’t agree. Or if they do, then they at least understand that that doesn’t matter one whit. Voters understand very well that someone is going to win regardless of who they vote for or whether they vote.
Only libertarians argue that none of the above will win. Or that with enough education of voters AnCapiStan will spring into bloom. Only libertarians fail to understand that politics has its own laws of inertia. Only American libertarians fail to understand that if something is going to change, then someone will need to be elected to make that happen.
That someone will have to be more socially adept than a fat fuck who strips down to his underwear or who wears a boot on his head as his candidate presentation. Hell, unless a country has 200% inflation and decades of bad decisions and 40% poverty rate, then even a guy who talks to dogs and looks like an Irish guitarist probably wouldn’t make it to the second round of voting.
On the other hand, Gary Moore could have taught Javier Milei a thing or two about playing guitar
Okay, but are they also going to listen to him about Russia and Ukraine? He's a hawk, which is a no-no for Reason and one of the few things most its commenters agree on. And out of the major party politicians, only Nikki Haley is like him in that regard
I believe so. A clash of civilizations is occurring. Far left central planning totalitarian despots are joining forces with religious theocrat despots in order to conquer and control the west. No free markets in a mafia state, only Orwellian slavery and dystopia.
Looter altruists of all communo-fascist persuasions are ganging up to wipe out objectivists and actual libertarians. This has been in progress since Ayn Rand declined to lick the blacking off Ronnie Reagan's mystical prohibitionist booties. Read the 1972 LP platform
No one gives a fuck about the 1972 LP platform other than you Hank.
Seriously? You think Reason wasn't hawkish on Ukraine with their constant war drumbeat? They've been more neutral on the Israel thing but that's mostly their support for terror sympathisers in academia.
The problem with Milei's speech is that the audience easily see that his ideas would strip them of much of their power - and they live for power. It's amazing none died of a stroke on the spot.
This speech should replace the State of the Union that SloJo will mumble and scream next week.
And yet, judging by their reaction to DJT. had HyR bloggers been HQd in Argentina, they'd've found awful things to write about Milei instead of good. And would've judged him about equal to the Peronists in badness.
I read the fake Argentine LP platform years ago, and it was mystical altruist drivel with no repeal of rights cannibalizing laws to speak of. Like My Lai himself, it rants in generalities like a Tea Party lynch mob, yet offered no rights. A cross-dressing anarco-fascist party of mystical girl-bulliers hardly qualifies. (https://bit.ly/3U8CeEF)
He should adjust his wig first before teaching anyone anything.
Well, at least he has a wig, and other markers of mental and physical health, unlike, say, the current POTUS.
Milei would be more like Trump if he put on his blonde wig.
Sounds like that wig is correlated with economically sound policy then.
Yes, they all believe in small government and then proceed to bloat it, especially with nepotism. But to your point, it is the vulgar Melania-like wife that is correlated with economically sound policy.
I mean we are already in Unfounded Claims Valley at this point, but what kind of economic policy is the Dr. Jill Biden style wife correlated with again?
Letting us eat cake?
For the current potus, a paper bag with two holes would also do.
Argentina will likely get a complete collapse and disastrous poverty.
They'll be eating each other for food, soon.
Noted, I will continue to follow the developments.
If Milei's vulgar wife would only finger her pussy in front of the camera like Melania the country would be gold!
Lol I absolutely can't even with you rn
Is Dirk a Shreek sock?
Argentina will likely get a complete collapse and disastrous poverty.
As opposed to the wonderful situation the Peronists fostered?
Or he could get a mob to vandalize a bunch of buildings, like Brazil's Trumpanzee--the one the voters ousted after a single term. Christiano-fascist National Socialism is no better or less coercive than any of the other variants of socialist collectivism. Look at Germany's economy in 1946!
Too many Reason readers are fingering themselves at the thought of Milei ...
That's better than Jilling Off With The Bidens™.
Better than taking it up the ass from your Marxist masters. Something you thoroughly enjoy, no doubt.
He looks like the sheriff from THE DUKES OF HAZZARD.
Roscoe PEE Coltrane is comin' to take all of yer freedoms! Coo, coo, coo!
You seem really threatened by him. I wonder if you can articulate why.
Sheriffs scare me.
Why is that? Are you scared that they're actually enforcing justice on those who did wrong?
oOOO. True Believers are tag teaming the non-Trumpanzee? Girl-bullier culture still idolizes song and dance girl-wrestler Andrew Geoffrey Kaufman. Sad.
Hapless misfits of the world, unite!
I wouldn't be so harsh on the LGBTQABCXYZSNOWFLAKE+++ crowd. They, supposedly, don't choose to be this way.
It's done. There is now the GOP of flaccid withdrawer Whutzisname of Flardy, and now the smaller, harder, angrier Anschluss Republican Party with a dozen girl-bullier wannabees losing to Oliver. So at least there's hope.
You were supposed to take a pill out of the bottle that says "Aricept" every morning to make the confusion go away, NOT the bottle that says "Viagra". Jesus Christ, what's with democrats and their tendency to abuse the elderly with dementia?
The thread title gave me an instant boner.
Lol what's with the down below obsession now xD
"Embracing economic freedom while ensuring responsible governance is surely the key to sustainable prosperity and continued global progress."
That's simple, prohibit government coercion.
...And the very foundation /definition of this Nation does that (prohibits government coercion) in everything except very specific authorized cases ... in case anyone cared to stop electing lawless Al'Capone's and Hitler wanna-be's to office to void that founding document for their own lawless armed-theft of their neighbors benefit.
I'm not the first to say it but, Milei for president!!!!!!
+100000000... The type of immigration that should be occurring.
Great you can vote for him in 4-7 years when he finally gets approved to immigrate here. Oh wait he is rich and famous so he can get in forthwith.
You have no understanding of immigration law, do you?
That's Duce, Caudillo or Fuhrer, white lamb.
Finally an article about Javier Milei that does not falsely claim he is far right or ultra-far right. He is more or less a libertarian and libertarians should know that there is a wide range of thought within the libertarian movement.
Also we are talking about a libertarian from another country which has different conditions and variables to factor and take into account. For example what works in Urban America typically does not work in Rural America as there are differences that make one-size-fits-all solutions untenable.
I would like to see Javier Milei succeed in reducing the size of the Argentina government and get control of their out-of-control inflation and monetary policies. I don't expect any politician from another country to fit nicely into definitions of our mess of a political system and for anyone to attempt to do such is simply idiotic.
Precisely so.
Every economic and political system is great on paper. The problem is the humans that end up on top of it will corrupt it and use it for selfish greed, aka self preservation. Therefore there is no viable system run by humans.
The sockpuppet describes altruism as though it meant reality.
> His speech in Davos challenged the growing worldwide trend of increased government involvement in economic affairs.
But! But! But! If Trump is not there telling us who we can't do business with, why might buy cheaper Mexican tomatoes! Please Trump, save us from the tomatoes! And change those trading rules on a weekly basis! For Grateness!
And don't get me started on that douchebag Biden...
Both God's Own Prohibitionists and the Democratic People's Party want men with guns to rob, jail or shoot you over thousands of different plant leaves, cacti, fungi and infusions thereof. Biden and Kerry froth as fanatical as Hoover, Reagan, Nixon, Anslinger, Reagan, William von Raab and Friedman's nemesis Billy Bennett. The Kleptocracy represents Christian National Socialist repression and Sino-Cuban Soviet Socialism in practically equal proportions. Only pro-freedom spoiler votes can slow this trainwreck.
You say the same stupid shit in every comment, and you say it with far too many obscure words and pointless references. You’re a joke here, and probably everywhere else.
Did you know that?
In what language did Vero try to understand the speech? Can anyone here quote ONE THING the My Lai Caudillo Statist offered to legalize? ONE prohibitionist law the yapper promised to REPEAL?
Just as communists say communism would work if only it were more communist, capitalists say capitalism would work if only it were more capitalist. Totally "free" markets will never work, just as totally "collectivist" markets won't. Capitalism needs a set of restraints that counter its natural tendency toward excess. The trick is figuring out who picks those restraints and who they restrain.
A lot less restraints than we currently have. You democrats are strangling this country.
Possibly so, but definitely more than none. As a child of the 50s and 60s, I remember when the US was far more regulated than it is today yet was still successful.
The US is far more regulated today than 60 years ago. The total number of regulations has increased. And there are several more federal agencies now (EPA, Dept. of Ed., etc).