A “Warmongering Zionist Neocon” Masquerading As A Libertarian

LewRockwell.com

Javier Milei Is a Neocon

Oscar Grau | unz.com

In April 2024, Javier Milei, current president of Argentina, said that his guiding stars were the well-known libertarian thinkers Murray Rothbard and Hans-Hermann Hoppe. Milei’s foreign policy and interventionist views suggest quite otherwise. Nevertheless, in September 2024, economists Philipp Bagus and Bernardo Ferrero (B&F) argued that Milei is not a neocon, but indeed a libertarian.

Strange enough, in parallel, Milei’s statements proving his support for American-Zionist imperialism are all over the place. Here are just a few of them until September 2024:

Israel, I consider such an ally that I’ve said that I will move the embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

I’ve indicated my alignment with the United States, with Israel and with the free world… I’m not willing… to establish relations with those who don’t respect liberal democracy… individual freedoms… and peace.

I argued… to endorse Israel’s right to legitimate self-defense… whatever [Israel] is doing, it is doing it within the rules of the game… Israel is not committing a single excess… despite the excesses committed by Hamas’ terrorists.

It’s so important to understand the link of freedom with Israel… because it’s a people… that has achieved… the conjunction between the spiritual and the material, and that spiritual-material harmony generates progress.

I consider the United States as an ally, regardless of whether it’s governed by a Democrat or a Republican.

[On the protests against the genocide in Gaza] I find the anti-Semitic behavior that is taking place in some [American] universities aberrant…

We stand on the right side of history… on the side of Israel… of the United States… of the West… and we’ll use all resources to defend ourselves against terrorists.

[At the UN]… it has been systematically voted against the State of Israel, which is the only country in the Middle East that defends liberal democracy.

Rothbard on the Neocons

True, no neocon, as B&F argue, had explicitly said that the state is a bunch of crooks and that they hate the state, but it is also true that no neocon has ever stopped doing what Rothbard condemned in 1992 either—which is exactly what Milei does:

… what animates the neocons first and foremost is foreign policy: The dominant and constant star of that foreign policy is the preservation and the aggrandizement, over all other considerations, of the State of Israel, the “little democracy in the Middle East.” Consequently, they favor massive foreign aid, especially to the State of Israel, and America as the dominant force in a New World Order that will combat “aggression” everywhere and impose “democracy” throughout the world, the clue to that “democracy” being not so much voting and free elections as stamping out “human rights violations” throughout the globe, particularly any expression, real or imagined, of anti-Semitism.

Thus, the fact that Milei says what he says about the state, while supporting amazingly murderous states, only worsens his situation. It is one more reason to label Milei as a hypocrite, who will sanctify Israel and try to help all his warmongering friends from Washington and NATO just as any other neocon. This is the reason why Argentina applied to be a global partner of NATO last year.

However, why should libertarians owe Milei not only the benefit of the doubt, but also their full support, if he behaves like just another member of a bunch of crooks? Why should libertarians take seriously his alleged intention to destroy the state from within if he has been praising and supporting statists who certainly do not want to destroy it? Such are the cases of Donald Trump, Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Benjamin Netanyahu. But no one in their right mind can take seriously someone who promises to fight crime when they are found praising and supporting criminals. To illustrate, Milei called Zelenskyy “an inspiration for the world,” and Zelenskyy thanked Milei for doing “everything” he asked him. Yet so badly do B&F want libertarians to conform to Milei’s foreign policy that dictator Zelenskyy and mass murderer Netanyahu slipped off their list of Milei allies.

Hoppe on the Neocons

In 2001, Hoppe summarized the neocons as follows:

The neoconservative movement… emerged in the late 1960s and early 1970s, when the American left became increasingly involved with Black Power politics, affirmative action, pro-Arabism, and the “counterculture.” In opposition to these tendencies, many traditional left-wing… intellectuals and cold war “liberals,”… broke ranks with their old allies, frequently crossing over from the long-time haven of left-wing politics… to the Republicans. Since then the neoconservatives… have gained unrivaled influence in American politics, promoting typically a “moderate” welfare state (“democratic capitalism”), “cultural conservatism” and “family values,” and an interventionist (“activist”) and in particular Zionist (“pro-Israel”) foreign policy.

Milei almost perfectly meets Hoppe’s description. His “cultural conservatism” can be seen in his opposition to feminism and so-called wokism. And although B&F say that Milei is an ardent critic of the welfare state, his “opposition” to it was pitiful during the presidential campaign. So “moderate” was Milei already that he not only promised to maintain welfare programs, but went so far as to call welfare recipients “victims of injustice,” arguing that the corrupt intermediaries of welfare were the victimizers—as if this corruption could be possible without any willing recipients. For Milei, the issue should be tackled through economic growth, which would invite people to abandon welfare. But welfarism encourages people to remain in it, and the example of much richer countries does not favor Milei’s thesis either. What’s more, in June 2024, a minister of Milei even boasted about the increased spending on various welfare programs.

Trump and Ludwig von Mises

B&F considered it ironic to denounce Milei as a neocon, whilst criticizing him for supporting and being a Trump ally. For Trump was, as they said when considering his first term in office at the time, the least interventionist American president of the last two decades. Additionally, B&F raise a question:

… if one is keen, just for his geo-political sympathies and pro-NATO stance, to declare Milei a neocon, what would one have to say of Mises who looking at post-war Europe argued for the establishment of a “permanent and lasting union” among western democracies and for “vesting all power in a new supernational authority” in order to avoid subjugation to totalitarianism… why should Milei’s position and statements be treated all that differently?

Criticism of Milei as a neocon holds up without his disconcerting Trumpism, which also does not make Milei look any better as a supposed libertarian. But even if Trump was the least interventionist, he has not been much better than the others. Actually, Trump was worse in certain aspects—as when revoking Barack Obama’s rule on reporting drone strike deaths and surpassing the drone strike numbers of Obama’s eight years in just two years.

The fact that Trump is just another warmonger in chief had already been true in his first term. For instance, he continued bombing foreign countries, increased military spending greatly, and vetoed ending military aid for the Saudi war in Yemen. So weak is B&F’s argument that the same could be said about the least interventionist after Trump. Because each president, with the circumstances that accompanied each one, basically added his imperialist novelties on top of the imperialism of the former. Something that the very second term of Trump proves.

Lastly, Mises never called himself an anarcho-capitalist. Therefore, Mises, who remained firmly rooted in the classical liberal tradition until his death, may be treated somewhat differently, since libertarians are logically more demanding of self-proclaimed anarcho-capitalists. Moreover, Mises was an opponent of imperialism and his classical liberalism cannot justify a defense of the State of Israel either. And yet, whatever Mises’ error, this does not make Milei any less wrong. At most, it makes Mises deserving proper criticism.

Ideas Move the World

According to B&F, not so much importance should realistically be given to Milei’s foreign policy, because Argentina practically does not influence anything on that level:

The support and change of bloc executed by Milei implies no moving away from the ideal with respect to the previous situation. His foreign policy stance is, for practical purposes, purely testimonial.

To begin with, Milei has displayed neoconservative views even years before being president, so he has not executed anything contrary to his long-held convictions. Certainly, in a sense, Milei’s foreign policy matters little, because Argentina’s army was never meant to decide the war in Ukraine, or to provide any substantial aid to Israel. But being a world star, the wider public links Milei’s foreign policy and views to the libertarian movement, which harms the movement’s reputation and goals. Thus, as the antiwar cause is a top priority for libertarians and the prevalence of some ideas has dire consequences, Milei’s foreign policy is truly relevant for practical purposes, not purely testimonial. For only public opinion, driven by the right ideas, will one day be able to exert sufficient pressure to bring about major improvements for peace. Milei, instead, has gone against Rothbard on the most important issue:

Since war and foreign policy provide the State with its easiest means of delusion and deception, Revisionist exposure on the foreign affairs front is the most important avenue of desanctification and delegitimation of the State apparatus and of State aggression.

Over the years, Milei has not only held views favorable to interventionism in foreign affairs, but also admiration for historical figures unequivocally in favor of war and statism, such as Winston Churchill.

In any case, B&F stress that “Milei engages in the popularization of Austro-libertarian ideas that are diametrically opposed to statism and neoconservatism.” However, as the true Austro-libertarians Octavio Bermúdez and Kristoffer Hansen have shown, apart from a few talking points, Milei does not demonstrate any significant knowledge of Austrian economics. Worse yet, he reveals a remarkable cognitive dissonance in his list and opinions regarding his favorite economists. And his knowledge of libertarianism, for example, of the work of Rothbard and Hoppe is no better. What all this implies is that Milei’s popularization of Austro-libertarian ideas is for the most part insignificant, because his popularization cannot be much better than his scant knowledge of such ideas.

Ultimately, the best B&F can do is to hold on to their unconvincing claim that Milei is not a neocon in the “traditional” sense of the term. And still, their justification for this claim can only be validated by denying several ideas of Rothbard and Hoppe and much evidence given by Milei’s own words—or, in fact, their justification can even be used against Milei himself. Take, for example, Milei’s militaristic policies, which are embellished by his celebration of the armed forces, his bragging about buying fighter jets, and his desire to get people to support ideas as essential to statism as national defense and the cult of the state soldier. To this must be added the promotion of the defense industry as fundamental to national development, the paternalism of the war on drugs, and the maintenance and increase of various welfare programs.

Jewish Elites

Without ever presenting Milei’s own justifications, B&F try to convince readers that Milei’s change of bloc is related to the way the Argentine citizenry perceives the matter, to the almost two decades of Kirchnerist flirting with the “eastern” bloc, and to cases of corruption and mismanagement—as if cases like these were not to happen anyway. However, beyond the fact that Argentina never had a particularly bad relationship with the “western” bloc under the Kirchnerists, what B&F do not tell is that the real reason why Milei looked to the other side as he did is his intimate relationship with Jewish elites. Though mainly propped up by Jewish figures in Argentina, Milei has never hidden who he serves above all.

In the past, besides being friends with famous Jewish journalist Mauricio Viale, who died in 2021, Milei was syndicated in some Zionist controlled newspapers and regularly featured on TV shows. In 2021, when he was running for congress, Milei struck up a relationship with Rabbi Axel Wahnish. Known as Milei’s spiritual advisor, Wahnish became through Milei the first rabbi to be appointed ambassador to Israel. With Wahnish, Milei studied Torah and got close to the Argentine Jewish community, the sixth largest in the world. Subsequently, Milei reached out to the Chabad-Lubavitch movement, meeting Rabbi Tzvi Grunblatt and Eduardo Elsztain. Grunblatt is the leader of this movement in Argentina. And Elsztain is a real estate billionaire commonly known as the “Owner of Argentina,” also involved in a wide variety of businesses, including agriculture, mining and others.

Aside from Elsztain’s support for his presidential candidacy, Milei obtained the support of other important Jewish actors, such as Gerardo Werthein, a member of the Werthein Group holding company, and Daniel Sielecki, a pharmaceutical entrepreneur. And eventually, Milei got the crucial support of rival candidate Patricia Bullrich for the ballot, another major ally of the Jews. Bullrich is now Milei’s security minister, but also held that position in 2017, when she signed on behalf of the Argentine government an agreement with the State of Israel on cooperation in public security and internal affairs. Bullrich’s husband, Guillermo Yanco, is a noted Zionist. He is a former vice president of the Holocaust Museum in Argentina, and a member of an international organization funded by American taxpayers, which has been accused of links to CIA interference in foreign countries.

Milei’s campaign headquarters was located in a hotel owned by Elsztain. And right after winning the presidency, on a private jet of the Wertheins, Milei went to New York City, where bankers and the grave of Chabad Rabbi Menachem Schneerson expected him. Werthein was initially appointed by Milei as ambassador to the United States. But in October 2024, Werthein became foreign minister, following Diana Mondino’s mistake of not voting with Israel in favor of the United States regarding the embargo on Cuba.

Other Jewish figures in Milei’s entourage include Julio Goldstein, linked to business and politics, and Marcelo Duclos, a writer who, like Bagus, wrote a book to celebrate Milei. And there is also Dario Epstein, one of Milei’s advisors during the 2023 campaign, and whom Milei supported in the 2024 elections of the Delegation of Argentine Israelite Associations, known for its fight against anti-Semitism.

Since Milei took office in December 2023, beyond the fervent Zionist foreign policy, the Argentine government has gotten closer than ever to other Israeli interests, including rapprochement with Israeli companies in lithium development projects and cooperation in water management.

Conclusion

Milei’s constant worship of Judaism, Jews and the State of Israel has earned him the latest Jewish Nobel Prize. But while for libertarians, when faced with libertarianism and Zionism, the choice is never in favor of the latter, Milei made the opposite choice.

Furthermore, given that Milei is a neocon and, therefore, an enemy of the libertarian cause, libertarians cannot be Mileists. Here, B&F made their choice, and had the audacity to praise Milei’s “paradigm shift” as a historical reality that should give us hope for the future. Nonetheless, what this supposed paradigm shift should give us is not hope, but a valuable lesson not to fall back into the propaganda of warmongering and genocidal elites. And finally, given the Austro-libertarian reputation of B&F, libertarians should accuse both of being covert allies of such elites.

Source: https://www.unz.com/article/javier-milei-is-a-neocon/

Image: Source [Edited] Ghibli Styled By ChatGTP

Original Article: https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/a-warmongering-zionist-neocon-masquerading-as-a-libertarian/