Milei Celebrates the Conquest Theory of the State

PAF

Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
13,559
Thomas DiLorenzo
April 17, 2025


The conquest theory of the state, associated with the German sociologist Franz Oppenheimer, holds that the origins of the state are in war and conquest. The personal X account of the Argentinian president celebrates the Argentinian government’s origins in war, conquest, and attempted genocide of the native population.

The text on X reads: “146 years after the beginning of the heroic enterprise led by the hero of the nation, General Julio Argentino Roca, we honor the Desert Campaign as a fundamental historical milestone in the history of our nation, which marked not only the expansion of the national territory, but also the foundation of the modern Argentine State.”

An Argentinian correspondent writes:

“Milei’s office is celebrating what can be described as a genocide, albeit a less famous one . . . . The Argentinian government successfully exterminated more or less all of the native populations by means of a series of “wars” where the natives armed with rudimentary spears and a few rifles faced an organized army with Remington rifles. The main warlords of these expeditions to the desert were the president Manuel Rosas and the infamous general and later president Julio Argentino Roca, the most ruthless and consequent proponent of a policy of extermination of the natives. Not only did the Argentinian army massacre about 15,000 natives, but the survivors had to endure a life of semi-slavery. It is horrible and yet telling that Milei’s office celebrates a horrible historical fat like the extermination of the natives . . . as though it was a feat of civilization and progress.”



 
as though it was a feat of civilization and progress.

Those natives would have done the same and celebrated it, as would have the ancestors of every nation on earth.

Could it have been done better? Probably, if the narrative presented here is accurate.

But it absolutely was a feat of civilization and progress.

Life is a war to survive, the Bible is full of GOD sanctioned conquest.

The only reasonable thing to do is to pick a side (like western Christianity or American style classical liberalism or some combination) and base your world view on what is best for the side you have chosen.
That might mean peace and trade or war and conquest in different times and circumstances.
Less reasonable but the only other logical option is to just say we are like wolves and might makes right, then you have to respect the conquests of opposed groups as well as equally pursuing your own.
It amounts to nearly the same thing.


This leftist obsession with hating our ancestors and vilifying the foundations of our civilization is disgusting and libertarians adopting it is even worse.
 
Those natives would have done the same and celebrated it, as would have the ancestors of every nation on earth.

Could it have been done better? Probably, if the narrative presented here is accurate.

But it absolutely was a feat of civilization and progress.

Life is a war to survive, the Bible is full of GOD sanctioned conquest.

The only reasonable thing to do is to pick a side (like western Christianity or American style classical liberalism or some combination) and base your world view on what is best for the side you have chosen.
That might mean peace and trade or war and conquest in different times and circumstances.
Less reasonable but the only other logical option is to just say we are like wolves and might makes right, then you have to respect the conquests of opposed groups as well as equally pursuing your own.
It amounts to nearly the same thing.


This leftist obsession with hating our ancestors and vilifying the foundations of our civilization is disgusting and libertarians adopting it is even worse.

If you believe good is or eventually is victorious, then the "Might" is theoretically the result of that goodness.

Traditional western Christian values have been pretty good historically at creating strong cultures with a lot of "Might".

In this way, Might doesn't make Right... but Right may actually make Might.
 
Back
Top