The Economist is getting picky about which neoliberal it thinks would be the best choice to most effectively destroy Argentina, when people go to the polls on Oct. 22. In its Sept. 7 article entitled “Can Radical Libertarianism Save Argentina?” the City of London weekly rag reports that, after a three-hour interview with self-proclaimed “anarcho-capitalist” Javier Milei, the extremist devotee of the Austrian School of economics who came in first in the Aug. 13 primaries, it has concluded that he’s not the right man for the job.
Does London fear that if elected, Milei might become a Frankenstein’s monster who couldn’t be controlled? Of course The Economist wants to see a return to real liberalism in “bloated statist Argentina,” which it describes as a place of “venal and incompetent politicians'’ plagued by “sclerotic state companies.” But the problem with Milei is that he is too “intemperate, rash and outlandish” and could become an authoritarian, if things don’t go his way. So, it asserts, “little about Mr. Milei suggests he is the savior Argentina needs.” The article proceeds with various explanations as to why Milei’s proposed dollarization won’t work—the country, in fact, has no dollars; why getting rid of the central bank isn’t feasible, and that, even if dollarization could stop the state from printing money, it wouldn’t “automatically restrain Argentina’s profligate fiscal policy.”
