[Milei WINS!] Javier Milei, Austrian econ. prof. & ancap, runs for president of Argentina

[acptulsa]

Maybe he's just trying to avoid getting his ass kicked by the superpower of the hemisphere.

 

[susano]

Yes, he is open about "converting" to Judaism.
That means he either was a cryptojew from a family of cryptojews all along or he is a Renegade Apostate denying Christ.
Neither says much for being able to trust him, but the former is slightly better than the latter.

Raised Catholic but probably marginally or just culturally. Severely abused by his father. Not sure about the mother. No connection to anything Christian in that. Not parents who exemplified it and a church full of Marxist pedos. He obviously had a vacuum to fill and looked to something he thought he was connected to. Pity.

 

[susano]

Maybe he's just trying to avoid getting his ass kicked by the superpower of the hemisphere.

It's possible but I don't think so. He seems to be a true believer in the NATO paradigm. My take on that - and I could be way off - is it's his hatred of communism that accounts for it. If that's it, it's blinded him to everything that's gone down since the collapse of the USSR and the Warsaw Pact. I see that mentality (cold war) all over with the situation in Ukraine and I find it intellectually lazy.

 

[Occam's Banana]

I'm trying to think of any way to read that other than at face value. The only thing I can come up with is a cautionary move against the influence of China, which is prudent, but it's probably more a matter a matter of it being it being just what it looks like. He's pro NATO and all that that means ("rules based order"). Not what I would have expected.

It's possible but I don't think so. He seems to be a true believer in the NATO paradigm. My take on that - and I could be way off - is it's his hatred of communism that accounts for it. If that's it, it's blinded him to everything that's gone down since the collapse of the USSR and the Warsaw Pact. I see that mentality (cold war) all over with the situation in Ukraine and I find it intellectually lazy.

Milei hates China (and Russia). That's been clear since before he was even elected.

I don't like it at all (the "sucking up to NATO" bit, not the anti-commie bit), but I don't think it's difficult to understand. Compared to the U.S. hegemony (which only seems to understand how to "bomb or bribe" other countries into cooperation), China excels at "winning friends and influencing people" (for example, China is one of Argentina's biggest creditors). This NATO suck-uppery is probably a hedge against that. (It occurs to me that Milei may also be hoping - as a kind of "side bonus" - to score some brownie points he can try to cash in on the Falklands issue. He has recently made remarks regarding his "diplomatic roadmap" on that matter.)

 

[susano]

Milei hates China (and Russia). That's been clear since before he was even elected.

I don't like it at all (the "sucking up to NATO" bit, not the anti-commie bit), but I don't think it's difficult to understand. Compared to the U.S. hegemony (which only seems to understand how to "bomb or bribe" other countries into cooperation), China excels at "winning friends and influencing people" (for example, China is one of Argentina's biggest creditors). This NATO suck-uppery is probably a hedge against that. (It occurs to me that Milei may also be hoping - as a kind of "side bonus" - to score some brownie points he can try to cash in on the Falklands issue. He has recently made remarks regarding his "diplomatic roadmap" on that matter.)

I'm 100% with him on hating commies but I find it tragic that Russia, who is not a communist country any longer is still saddled with that. As for NATO, I don't know how far he's gonna get with any of ideas about those islands since the UK is an actual NATO member. Those islands are all Brits and they don't want to be part of Argentina. Given Argentina's history and problems, who can blame them?

 

[Occam's Banana]

I'm 100% with him on hating commies but I find it tragic that Russia, who is not a communist country any longer is still saddled with that.

Russia is still fascist/authoritarian, and it's ruled by an autocratic ex-KGBer. I can't really blame any leader of a country that has been pretty well fucked over by Marxism & Marxist ideology for holding a grudge and/or being paranoid. (For example, I don't like Milei's pro-Ukraine stances and rhetoric, but I strongly suspect they are driven much more by ant-Russian sentiment than they are by pro-Ukraine sentiment.)

As for NATO, I don't know how far he's gonna get with any of ideas about those islands since the UK is an actual NATO member. Those islands are all Brits and they don't want to be part of Argentina. Given Argentina's history and problems, who can blame them?

I'm skeptical he'll get anywhere on the Falklands thing. But it's not a matter of how far you or I think he can get. It's a matter of how far he (correctly or incorrectly) thinks he can get. And who knows? It might turn out to be worth more to the UK and NATO for them to sink their hooks into Argentina than it is for the UK to continue holding the Falklands. (And in that or any similar case, what the Falklanders themselves may or may not want won't have much if anything to do with it. If it somehow does come to that, it's not like they can force Britain to keep them.)

 

[susano]

Russia is still fascist/authoritarian, and it's ruled by an autocratic ex-KGBer. I can't really blame any leader of a country that has been pretty well $#@!ed over by Marxism & Marxist ideology for holding a grudge and/or being paranoid. (For example, I don't like Milei's pro-Ukraine stances and rhetoric, but I strongly suspect they are driven much more by ant-Russian sentiment than they are by pro-Ukraine sentiment.)



I'm skeptical he'll get anywhere on the Falklands thing. But it's not a matter of how far you or I think he can get. It's a matter of how far he (correctly or incorrectly) thinks he can get. And who knows? It might turn out to be worth more to the UK and NATO for them to sink their hooks into Argentina than it is for the UK to continue holding the Falklands. (And in that or any similar case, what the Falklanders themselves may or may not want won't have much if anything to do with it. If it somehow does come to that, it's not like they can force Britain to keep them.)

Russia has no history, like the US, of liberty or the early US republic. It's so vastly different with a mind blowing history and a set of problems entirely different from anything our own country has faced. When the USSR collapsed, the Russian people, in a system of communism up until that point, were looted by opportunistic predators who were fast ruining anything that was left and establishing a Jewish Mafia state. Putin saved Russia and it's prosperous and a lot freer than it's ever been in it's entire history. In a system like ours (or Europe's), it would quickly devolve back into communism, imo.

There is no way in hell the UK will ever cede those islands. No way. It's not like some other commonwealth state like, say, in the Caribbean. The Falklands are all Brits. That makes a huge difference. I see Milei's desires on it akin to to Russia trying to get Alaska back.

 

[Occam's Banana]

Russia has no history, like the US, of liberty or the early US republic. It's so vastly different with a mind blowing history and a set of problems entirely different from anything our own country has faced. When the USSR collapsed, the Russian people, in a system of communism up until that point, were looted by opportunistic predators who were fast ruining anything that was left and establishing a Jewish Mafia state. Putin saved Russia and it's prosperous and a lot freer than it's ever been in it's entire history. In a system like ours (or Europe's), it would quickly devolve back into communism, imo.

There is no way in hell the UK will ever cede those islands. No way. It's not like some other commonwealth state like, say, in the Caribbean. The Falklands are all Brits. That makes a huge difference. I see Milei's desires on it akin to to Russia trying to get Alaska back.

*shrug* Tell it to Javier.

(And Hong Kong was worth a hell of a lot more to Britain than the Falklands are, but the Brits didn't have much problem selling them out.)

 

[susano]

*shrug* Tell it to Javier.

(And Hong Kong was worth a hell of a lot more to Britain than the Falklands are, but the Brits didn't have much problem selling them out.)

Yes, but there was a lease on Hong Kong and it expired. I don't think war with China over it was an option. They did go to war over the Falklands. It seems like a strange thing for Milei to get fixated on and if he's thinking of making an alliance with NATO to kind of protect Argentina is any Argentine move to try and take them back, he should shut up about it and secure the NATO alliance first

 

[Occam's Banana]

Yes, but there was a lease on Hong Kong and it expired. I don't think war with China over it was an option. They did go to war over the Falklands. It seems like a strange thing for Milei to get fixated on and if he's thinking of making an alliance with NATO to kind of protect Argentina is any Argentine move to try and take them back, he should shut up about it and secure the NATO alliance first

My point is that the British claim on Hong Kong was extremely valuable to them (and such "leases" have been broken over much less), but they still gave it up despite its great value because they didn't deem it to be worth the potential cost of keeping it (such as open hostilities or even war with China).

Likewise, if Britain regards (or comes to regard) giving up the Falklands - which is worth far, far less to them than Hong Kong was - as being "worth it" (such as by being part of the price for bringing Argentina more firmly under the thumb of NATO), then there's no particular reason why they couldn't or wouldn't do so. (The fact that they were willing to fight over the Falklands in 1982 is irrelevant to this point - they had nothing to gain by just letting Argentina forcibly take the Falklands from them then.)

Also, "shut[ting] up about it and secur[ing] the NATO alliance first" would defeat the entire purpose of making the Falklands a NATO-alliance bargaining chip (assuming such a gambit is even part of Milei's angle in the first place - at this point, it's merely idle speculation on my part, due to the coincidental timing of Milei's "NATO alliance" talk with his Falklands "diplomatic roadmap" talk).

I have no idea how much Britain values its possession of the Falklands - but there is some price at which it could be "worth it" to them. I am doubtful that Milei will be able to meet that price, whatever it might be (and I am even more doubtful that he should, even if he could) - but to think that it doesn't exist because of Britain's honorable and selfless devotion to the wishes of the people of the Falklands is, frankly, naively sentimental hooey (just ask Hong Kong).

 

[ClaytonB]

//

My unsolicited summary: A bird in the hand is worth any number of birds in the bush. Milei has actually shut down huge swathes of the Argentine government and fired tens of thousands of bureaucrats, and he is actually shutting down the Argentine Central Bank, etc. Theoretically, he might do a little better on this or that foreign policy position that affects me in absolutely no way whatsoever. The very fact that the Marxist globalists want me to be up in arms about the hypothetical birds in the bush which Milei could theoretically improve upon makes me value the bird in the hand all the more. Go get 'em, Milei!!

 

[susano]

My point is that the British claim on Hong Kong was extremely valuable to them (and such "leases" have been broken over much less), but they still gave it up despite its great value because they didn't deem it to be worth the potential cost of keeping it (such as open hostilities or even war with China).

Likewise, if Britain regards (or comes to regard) giving up the Falklands - which is worth far, far less to them than Hong Kong was - as being "worth it" (such as by being part of the price for bringing Argentina more firmly under the thumb of NATO), then there's no particular reason why they couldn't or wouldn't do so. (The fact that they were willing to fight over the Falklands in 1982 is irrelevant to this point - they had nothing to gain by just letting Argentina forcibly take the Falklands from them then.)

Also, "shut[ting] up about it and secur[ing] the NATO alliance first" would defeat the entire purpose of making the Falklands a NATO-alliance bargaining chip (assuming such a gambit is even part of Milei's angle in the first place - at this point, it's merely idle speculation on my part, due to the coincidental timing of Milei's "NATO alliance" talk with his Falklands "diplomatic roadmap" talk).

I have no idea how much Britain values its possession of the Falklands - but there is some price at which it could be "worth it" to them. I am doubtful that Milei will be able to meet that price, whatever it might be (and I am even more doubtful that he should, even if he could) - but to think that it doesn't exist because of Britain's honorable and selfless devotion to the wishes of the people of the Falklands is, frankly, naively sentimental hooey (just ask Hong Kong).

Argentina (or Milei) needs or wants NATO more than NATO needs Argentina - maybe. If so, remaining quiet about intentions to grab the Falklands would seem like the better move because once Argentina is in (whatever the association and "in" means), NATO would not want to lose them over British territory - maybe. Then again, you might be right because of what's going on with Ukraine and Russia and NATO taking the position against old territory being taken back. They may firmly come down on the side of the Brits and oppose Milei on that. In that case, you're right that he can use it as a bargaining chip to give NATO access to Argentina, if NATO wants it. I guarantee, though, the UK will under no circumstances give up the Falklands. I agree that Hong Kong was very, very valuable but Hong Kong was overwhelmingly populated Chinese people. The Falklands are as British as England. Prince Andrew fought that in war and there are families alive who lost family member servicemen in that war. Plus, they had that had referendum affirming the people there want to remain under British control. Maybe when everyone touched by that war is dead, it might change hands, but not before that.

I find it dismissive of the will of the people who actually live on those islands that Milei would be entertaining this idea and I'd like to know what he's thinking. Is it just because proximity or does he have some kind of plans he envisions for a base or mining or whatever. Right now, there are penguins and other cool wildlife that inhabit those islands. I hope it stays that way, however it turns out.

 

[WarriorLiberty]

Argentina (or Milei) needs or wants NATO more than NATO needs Argentina - maybe. If so, remaining quiet about intentions to grab the Falklands would seem like the better move because once Argentina is in (whatever the association and "in" means), NATO would not want to lose them over British territory - maybe. Then again, you might be right because of what's going on with Ukraine and Russia and NATO taking the position against old territory being taken back. They may firmly come down on the side of the Brits and oppose Milei on that. In that case, you're right that he can use it as a bargaining chip to give NATO access to Argentina, if NATO wants it. I guarantee, though, the UK will under no circumstances give up the Falklands. I agree that Hong Kong was very, very valuable but Hong Kong was overwhelmingly populated Chinese people. The Falklands are as British as England. Prince Andrew fought that in war and there are families alive who lost family member servicemen in that war. Plus, they had that had referendum affirming the people there want to remain under British control. Maybe when everyone touched by that war is dead, it might change hands, but not before that.

I find it dismissive of the will of the people who actually live on those islands that Milei would be entertaining this idea and I'd like to know what he's thinking. Is it just because proximity or does he have some kind of plans he envisions for a base or mining or whatever. Right now, there are penguins and other cool wildlife that inhabit those islands. I hope it stays that way, however it turns out.

NATO would not want to lose them over British territory - maybe. Then again, you might be right because of what's going on with Ukraine and Russia and NATO taking the position against old territory being taken back.

Javier Mileis so far polices in Argentina arent working as the polices are hurting the working class.
Yet this is the position Mileis taken over more about.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Javier Mileis so far polices in Argentina arent working as the polices are hurting the working class.
Yet this is the position Mileis taken over more about.

His policies haven't had time to work.
But him pursuing this NATO/Falklands garbage will make it harder for his good policies to work.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Argentina (or Milei) needs or wants NATO more than NATO needs Argentina - maybe. If so, remaining quiet about intentions to grab the Falklands would seem like the better move because once Argentina is in (whatever the association and "in" means), NATO would not want to lose them over British territory - maybe. Then again, you might be right because of what's going on with Ukraine and Russia and NATO taking the position against old territory being taken back. They may firmly come down on the side of the Brits and oppose Milei on that. In that case, you're right that he can use it as a bargaining chip to give NATO access to Argentina, if NATO wants it. I guarantee, though, the UK will under no circumstances give up the Falklands. I agree that Hong Kong was very, very valuable but Hong Kong was overwhelmingly populated Chinese people. The Falklands are as British as England. Prince Andrew fought that in war and there are families alive who lost family member servicemen in that war. Plus, they had that had referendum affirming the people there want to remain under British control. Maybe when everyone touched by that war is dead, it might change hands, but not before that.

I find it dismissive of the will of the people who actually live on those islands that Milei would be entertaining this idea and I'd like to know what he's thinking. Is it just because proximity or does he have some kind of plans he envisions for a base or mining or whatever. Right now, there are penguins and other cool wildlife that inhabit those islands. I hope it stays that way, however it turns out.

China was also a much bigger threat in a war than Argentina would be, and Hong Kong was much father away from the UK than the Falklands are.

 

[WarriorLiberty]

This Milei is becoming quite a clown for the globalists.

NATO Deputy Secretary General meets with Minister of Defence of Argentina

 

[Invisible Man]

This Milei is becoming quite a clown for the globalists.

How so?

 

[Occam's Banana]

Milei says Argentina just had its first budget surplus in 16 years after gutting government bloat
https://notthebee.com/article/milei...st-had-their-first-budget-surplus-in-16-years
{Commodore Vanderbilt | 23 April 2024}

Well, who would have guessed it?

The man who ran on slashing the government just achieved the unthinkable.

Javier Milei announced that for the first time in 16 years, Argentina's government has a budget surplus.

It worked:

https://twitter.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1782822516714520878

​

In the first quarter of 2024, the South American country recorded a budget surplus of about 275 billion pesos (some $309 million at the official rate), he told national TV late Monday.

This amounted to a surplus of 0.2 percent of GDP.

"This is the first quarter with a financial surplus since 2008," said Milei, referring to his left-wing rival Cristina Kirchner's first year in the presidency.

Milei, who took office in December, boasted of "a feat of historic significance on a global scale."
​

Long live freedom, indeed!

When he came into office, Milei immediately cut the number of government-run ministries and departments in half. Because at least half of Argentina's government was pointless.

And did the country fall apart? Were there riots in the street?

​

"If the state does not spend more than it collects and does not issue (money), there is no inflation. This is not magic," the self-described "anarcho-capitalist" said.
​

This dude gets it.

It's not magic. Everyone gets it. But he actually did it.

VIVA LA LIBERTAD!

Now let's take a look closer to home:

https://twitter.com/Not_the_Bee/status/1764761484670701830
[link: https://notthebee.com/article/the-n...-trillion-every-100-days-so-that-cant-be-good]

​

 

[ClaytonB]

WHY I FIGHT:

 

[Snowball]

It's only a QUARTERLY budget surplus, and it's only the first since 2008.

Meanwhile the protests rage.

https://english.elpais.com/internat...public-education-is-an-inalienable-right.html