Anarcho-Capitalism | Javier Milei Part of the WEF Agenda

Anarcho-Capitalism | Javier Milei Part of the WEF Agenda

ZeroHedge News | Tyler Durden

What Is Anarcho-Capitalism?

Jeffrey A. Tucker | The Epoch Times

The presidential victory of Javier Milei in Argentina puts at the head of state the first self-proclaimed “anarcho-capitalist” in modern history—or probably the first person ever to win an election at this level to identify with that term.

In the meantime, I’ve had many people ask me precisely what this is. So here is the explanation as I understand it.

Central to the idea is that society does not require an entrenched entity of legalized compulsion and coercion called the state in order to enjoy the enforcement of property rights, contracts, defense, and commercial society generally. The fusing of the terms anarchism and capitalism is not a plan for the social order but rather a prediction of what would happen in a civilized community in the absence of the state.

Myth one: it is not “right-wing,” contrary to the New York Times, the Guardian, and a thousand other venues. The “right” in Prussia was for the unity of church, state, and business. The “right” in France was for the divine right of the monarchy to rule. The “right” in America is all over the place in U.S. history but hardly consistent for liberty as a first principle of socio-political life. The notion of “anarcho-capitalism” is outside the left-right binary.

Myth two: the “anarcho” part has nothing to do with Antifa or chaos. The use of the term anarchism here means only the abolition of the state and its replacement with property relationships, voluntary action, private law, and contract enforcement as provided by free enterprise. It does not mean lawless; it means law as an extension of human volition and social evolution rather than imposition from above. Order is the daughter of liberty, not the mother, said Proudhon, and anarcho-capitalists would agree.

Myth three: not everyone who proclaims himself to be an “anarcho-capitalist” speaks for the school of thought, not by a long shot. The designation represents a broad ideal with thousands of iterative applications and a huge diversity of views within, same as any other ideological camp. I’m aware of some who favored COVID lockdowns and shot mandates, and others who keep finding ways to justify war and mass redistribution schemes, for example. Thus should Milei not be held responsible for every cockamamie thing ever said or written by a self-described adherent.

The term originates in the work of American economist (and my beloved mentor) Murray Rothbard, who was strongly influenced in his libertarianism by novelist Ayn Rand in the 1950s. (One of Milei’s dogs is named Murray.) But as Rothbard examined Rand’s work closely, he began to develop doubts about the institution Rand insisted was necessary and essential, namely the state itself. If we are to have property rights, why is the state alone permitted to violate them? If we are to have self-ownership, why is the state the only institution allowed to trample on people via conscription, segregation, and otherwise? If we seek peace, why do we want a state to wage war? And so on.

In Rothbard’s view, a consistent rule in society prohibiting aggression against person and property would have to apply also to the state itself, which has been historically the most socially damaging violator of human rights that there is. We tolerate states to defend our rights only to find out that the state is the main threat to our rights. This way of thinking also observes that no one has ever come up with a technology or system that has successfully restrained the state once it is created. (Highly recommended for deeper understanding: Rothbard’s “Anatomy of the State,” a free download.)

Many anarchists of the socialist left have made similar observations but Rothbard’s spin was one of an analytical prediction concerning what would take the place of the state in its absence. Rothbard said that a society without a state would not be a community governed by perfect sharing of resources and egalitarian sameness, much less some magical elevation beyond human nature, as the left-utopians said. Rather, it would be one of ownership, commerce, the division of labor, investment, private courts, stock markets, private ownership of capital, and all the rest. In other words, a free economy would thrive more than ever without the state, and we would see an ordered liberty brought to its highest possible level of realization.

Keep in mind that pushing forward this idea put Rothbard at odds with practically everyone from the Marxists to the Trotskyites to the Randians to the conservatives and old-style classical liberals who believed that states are necessary for courts, law, and security. It even put him at odds with another one of his mentors, Ludwig von Mises himself, whose only conception of anarchism came from European intellectual circles: they were surely among the least responsible minds on the Continent.

Rothbard’s anarchism was American to the core: more influenced by Colonial times than the Spanish Civil War. He believed that communities could manage themselves without an overlord with the power to tax, inflate the currency, conscript, and murder. He believed that markets and the creativity of peaceful human cooperation would always produce better results than institutions cobbled together by elites and enforced by compulsion. That applies even to courts, security, and law, all of which he believed to be better provided via market forces within the framework of universal norms governing ownership and human action.

In this Rothbard was revisiting a debate from 19th-century France. Frédéric Bastiat (1801–1850) was a great economist and classical liberal who wrote some of the most compelling writings for freedom of his generation or even ever. But he always held out in his mind the belief in the necessity of some state to keep the system functioning lest society descend into chaos. Opposing him in this was the lesser-known intellectual Gustav de Molinari (1819–1912) who wrote that all functions necessary for social operations under freedom can be provided via market forces. In many ways, Molinari was the actual first “anarcho-capitalist,” though he never used that term.

To be sure, high-level theory originating in Paris salons during the Belle Epoque or New York City intellectual circles in the 1950s are one thing. But putting all this into practice is another. Here is where the test for Milei really is. At this point, his theory is just that, perhaps an inspiration to give courage of conviction but it is hardly a blueprint. He faces a massive administrative state that is deeply entrenched, a collapsed currency, a corrupted court system, a hostile legislature, an enemy media, and 100 years of egregious pension liabilities.

How does one man take all this on? We don’t really know the answer to this question. No leader of a Western democratic developed nation has ever attempted a full-scale routing of a corrupted establishment on this level. Neither Reagan nor Thatcher, as far-reaching as their reforms were, ever cut the budget overall much less really abolished whole agencies. They were reformers within the framework. Milei is being called to do something never done before, in the midst of a grave crisis for the nation.

You don’t have to accept anarcho-capitalism fully to appreciate the drive and hope here. Who would you trust most to beat back the state, someone who strongly believes in some features of it or someone who opposes the whole structure root and branch? This much is clear: this ideological orientation is going to infuse any statesman with a fiery opposition to every corruption, every compulsion, every racket, every scam pushed by the administrative elite. The anarcho-capitalist orientation at least provides a guiding light that could end in more liberty for everyone.

The internal and external forces allied against his success are unthinkably vast. And he is racing against the clock. In a year, the whole of elite media is going to be yelling that “anarcho-capitalism” in Argentina has failed. Promise. That’s how absurd things have become.

Let’s say that Milei gets diverted by neoliberal globalists and pursues reforms that only follow the neo-liberal playbook of the late 20th century and following 2008. Can that be blamed on anarcho-capitalism? Absolutely not.

Anarcho-capitalism is not granting freedom to the largest corporations under oligarchic control to pillage and profit at the people’s expense. It is not “privatizing” functions of the state that should not exist in the first place. It is not selling off state resources to cronies and bandits. It is not contracting out lame public services to the highest bidder. It doesn’t mean allowing tech companies to become state partners in citizen surveillance and control. These are all corruptions of a more pure idea of capitalism. And it certainly is not complying with the dictates of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, the Word Economic Forum (WEF), much less the U.S. State Department.

There is every reason to be encouraged by Milei’s victory if only because it shows there is a populist demand out there for radical reform and this can in fact win elections. We should hope that GOP candidates in the United States are watching and listening. They seem to have defaulted back to canned speeches and scripted answers, which only bore a public that is fed up with the status quo and ready for someone with the vision and energy of a Milei to get serious.

This might only be round one of many more to come. He might fail. But the desperate need for fundamental and far-reaching reform and revolution in all industrialized democracies to put the people back in charge can hardly be doubted anymore. And if he fails, after a valiant effort, at least we will have had, as Rothbard once said, a temporary but “glorious holiday” from the political and administrative status quo we live with every day.

There is every reason to believe that Milei is just the beginning of a new trend that could spread all over the world. People are fed up and are ready for a radical new direction. Something has to be done to stop the relentless march of the forces of tyranny in Western nations.

Original Article:


Here is the man who was just elected President of Argentina, Javier Milei detailing his plans for the government.

Argentina on the Brink of Collapse: “Anarcho-Capitalist” Javier Milei Is Part of the WEF Agenda

Global Research | Ernst Wolff

A new president was elected in Argentina this week. He is Javier Milei, a man from the financial sector with no political experience, who describes himself as an “anarcho-capitalist”. 

During the election campaign, Milei announced that he wanted to abolish numerous ministries and the Argentine central bank, privatize broadcasting, introduce the US dollar as the national currency and organize the trade in human organs in a market economy. Immediately after his election, he announced that his first trips would take him to the USA and Israel. 

Who is this man and what will he achieve?

Javier Milei is a 53-year-old economist who has worked at the major bank HSBC and in the past as an advisor to the Argentinian government. For 10 years he was chief economist at Corporación América International, an airport operator and one of the most important concessionaires of the Argentinian state – and a partner company of the World Economic Forum. The president of the company, billionaire and WEF contributor Eduardo Eurnakian, promoted Milei and brought him into politics – an interesting parallel to Ukrainian President Selenskyj and his patron, billionaire Kolomoisky. However, Eurnakian has distanced himself from his protégé since Milei’s derogatory comments about Pope Francis.

Like Selenskyj and his predecessor as Argentinian president, Alberto Fernandez, Milei is listed by the World Economic Forum as a contributor to its agenda. In fact, he has consistently represented the positions of the WEF in the recent past. Although initially against vaccination, he has argued for mandatory vaccination during the coronavirus crisis, is firmly on the side of the Zelensky regime in the Ukraine war and stands shoulder to shoulder with the IDF and Benjamin Netanyahu in the Israel war. 

The election campaign that brought Milei to power took place at a time of extremely difficult social and economic conditions for the Argentinian people. 50% of Argentinians are dependent on state payments and 40% live below the poverty line. Until the 1950s, Argentina was the richest country in South America, with a standard of living comparable to that in Europe.

The fact that things have gone downhill since then is mainly due to the fact that the country has become increasingly indebted and has therefore become more and more dependent on the International Monetary Fund IMF. To date, Argentina has received more than 20 loans from the IMF, including the largest loan ever granted by the IMF of 57 billion dollars in 2018. The country is currently in debt to the IMF to the tune of 44 billion dollars. Of course, the IMF loans are not available without clear instructions from the US-controlled financial institution. All loans are tied to so-called structural adjustment programs, which reduce the standard of living of the majority of the population through strict austerity policies.

Milei has now announced that he intends to take this austerity policy to a whole new level by completely slashing the social sector. In other words, he wants to proceed like the Greek government during the euro crisis. Pensions will fall, the healthcare and education systems will face drastic cuts and energy prices will certainly be raised – all for the benefit of the IMF.

By dismantling the central bank, Milei will certainly not take the country one step forward, as the replacement of the peso and the introduction of the US dollar will not free Argentina but will make it 100 percent subject to the US central bank, the Federal Reserve, and its monetary policy, turning Argentina into a colony of the United States.  

The fact that Milei was mainly elected by poor young Argentinians is revealing. On the one hand, this shows that the social media and the financiers behind them obviously gave him a lot of support, but on the other hand it also shows the social desperation of many people who were left with only the choice between plague and cholera in this election.

In any case, one thing is certain: as president, Milei will pursue the agenda of the digital-financial complex from day one, submit to the Fed, which is now dependent on BlackRock, and launch the toughest and harshest austerity program in South American history to date. However, this will put him in direct confrontation with the majority of the Argentinian population. The disillusionment that we will soon experience will be extremely great – and will certainly lead to enormous social upheaval in the country.

Original Article:

Argentina – A Political Earthquake

Peter Koenig

On Sunday, 19 November, the extreme neoliberal Javier Mileiwon the run-off elections with 56% against 44% for the present Peronist (center left) Minister of Economy, Sergio Massa. This is more than a surprise. On 23 October, during the first-round vote, Massa had a 36% to 30% lead. Massa is an experienced economist and well-versed politician. Milei is neither.

However, Milei boasts he will drastically reduce Argentina’s inflation, currently more than 140%, get rid of the Argentine Central Bank and adopt the dollar as the national currency, replacing the Peso. This is just one of his radial neoliberal measures he plans for Argentina.

Introduction of the US dollar as the national currency is the most drastic measure Milei announced way ahead of the elections – and it would be more than surprising if Argentinians just 22 years after the economy totally collapsed (2000-2002), precisely because then-President Carlos Menem’s dollarized Argentina in 1991 by pegging the Peso 1:1 against the dollar. Already then, the argument was “fighting inflation.”

This “argument” was strongly advanced by Washington and the IMF, while every sane economist knows that you cannot run a country which has its own culture and economic parameters with the currency of another country. It is unbelievable, that neither Washington, the FED, nor the IMF should have no even-headed economists.

In today’s George Orwell’s 1984 world, everything goes. If people go along, why not. The Tavistock Institute, whose specialty is social engineering and mind manipulation, will take care of it. In the Western world, it happens almost permanently.

There is one country in South America, Ecuador, which is since 2000 fully dollarized. Almost exactly when Argentina’s economy sank into an abyss, because of dollarization, the then right-wing Ecuadorian President Jamil Mahuad, under pressure from Washington / FED and the IMF, dollarized the hydrocarbon-rich South American nation – allegedly for the same reason, “hyperinflation.”

No lesson learned by sovereign Ecuador. Her economy runs by petrol income. More than 50% of export earning stem form petrol – and US oil companies control the rich Ecuadorian hydrocarbon resources.

Ever since, the US dollar replaced Ecuador’s national currency, the Sucre. Ecuador’s economy is enslaved to Washington’s economy, hovering in a crisis, some times more than others. To the detriment of the population, Ecuador’s politicians are easily manipulated and corrupted by the US.

Argentina has a diversity of riches – and a well-educated population. Those factors have helped Argentina to recover relatively well after the downfall 20 years ago.

Image: Mauricio Macri

Argentinians, for sure have not forgotten the misery they went through 20 years ago, and a similar onslaught of poverty-inducing economic measures by another neo-liberal /neo-fascist president, Mauricio Macri (December 2015 – December 2019) – a four-year period during which Macri made sure that the riches gained by hardworking Argentinians during the 15 years of recovery, were transferred north – to the IMF, Wall Street, and the elites of the Unite States, Europe and international corporations.

The same is happening now. And most Argentinians, according to the election results, would go along? Hardly.

So, there must be a hidden agenda to subdue and “social-engineer” the masses so that they refrain from protesting, no questions asked, with a new fraud dismantling their economy under the pretext of reducing inflation.

Inflation can be artificially-induced, especially in countries whose economies are strongly dependent on the US dollar,as is Argentina, despite her efforts to de-dollarize by trading in local currencies. This works well with China, Argentina’s second largest trading partner (2022).

As part of Mercosur, Brazil is Argentina’s main trading partner for both exports and imports, followed by China, the United States, India, Chile, Paraguay, and Germany. Other than China, most of these countries trade in US dollars or the dollar-dependent Euros.

By far the largest investor in Argentina is the US, with more than US$ 12.6 billion (2022), mainly in agriculture, manufacturing, oil and gas, communications and technology, and financial services. This is an increase of 3.6 % over 2021. A sign that dollar-dependency may be increasing.

See this and this.

With dollars flooding the nation, artificially generating inflation in a country proven vulnerable for hyper price hikes already in the 1980s, is like 101 of manipulating economics.

Argentina is a member of China’s Belt and Road. The BRICS Summit in August 2023 in Johannesburg, South Africa, welcomed Argentina as one of the six new BRICS members as of 1 January 2024.

How the Belt and Road and the new BRICS membership will fit into Milei’s radical neoliberal agenda remains to be seen.

If Javier Milei, who has the support of Donald Trump and Elon Musk, succeeds in pulling through with his radical economic measures, the population may be programmed for enormous hardship like in 2001 / 2002, or worse. Working then in Argentina, experiencing this misery first hand, it is difficult to believe that Argentinians would be so easily and so quickly “forgettable”, just to be duped again with the same medicine.

There is so far no proof, but it is more than suspicious, and likely that there was fraud involved in these run-off elections.This often happens, a sudden turn-around between the first election results and the run-off vote. Curiously, there are never any exit polls taken by neutral observers in such crucial and fraud-prone elections.

Question: will Argentina succumb to the globalists, giving up her riches for an international US-led elite, giving away for the third time in about three decades, Argentina’s fortune and resources to a globalist clan, led by the visible face of the World Economic Forum (WEF), but whose strings are pulled by a financial elite lurking in the dark?

Original Article: