Milei Economics: The Extreme Alienation of Neoliberalism

Javier Milei, who calls himself a “liberal and anarcho-capitalist,” after being elected President of Argentina, took “the chainsaw government” as his political banner, loudly proclaimed the slogan “the state is the root of all evil,” and put forward a package of radical reform plans. These measures and his personal philosophy are collectively referred to as “Milei Economics,” a product of the intertwining of the global resurgence of right-wing conservatism with Argentina’s economic crisis.

自称“自由主义者和无政府资本主义者”的哈维尔·米莱当选为阿根廷总统以后，以“电锯政府”为政治旗帜，高喊“国家是万恶之源”的口号，提出一揽子激进改革方案。这些举措及其个人理念被称为“米莱经济学”，它是全球右翼保守主义回潮与阿根廷经济危机交织的产物。

The Concept and Practice of Milei Economics

米莱经济学的理念及实践

The neoliberal paradigm provided the soil for the extreme practice of Milei Economics, making it a radical representative of neoliberalism. The core of Milei Economics is a deep fusion of Austrian School market fundamentalism with right-wing populism, an extreme alienation of neoliberalism against the backdrop of Argentina’s political and economic crisis.

新自由主义范式为米莱经济学的极端化实践提供了土壤，使其成为新自由主义的激进代表。米莱经济学的核心是奥地利学派市场原教旨主义与右翼民粹主义的深度融合，是新自由主义在阿根廷政治经济危机背景下的极端异化。

At the ideological level, Milei’s ideological stance is essentially Austrian School market fundamentalism, which negates and demonizes Marxism, criticizes the concept of “social justice,” opposes the welfare state, rejects any form of social security and redistribution policies, characterizes left-wing populism as “state parasites,” and accuses Peronism of being “the chief culprit for Argentina’s century-long economic predicament.”

在意识形态层面，米莱的意识形态立场本质上是奥地利学派市场原教旨主义，否定与妖魔化马克思主义，批判“社会正义”理念，否定福利国家，反对任何形式的社会保障和再分配政策，将左翼民众主义定性为“国家寄生虫”，指责庇隆主义是阿根廷“百年经济困局的罪魁祸首”。

At the academic theoretical level, Milei Economics fully absorbs anti-interventionist logic, defines the state as “the enemy of freedom,” and pushes the logic of anti-government intervention to its extreme. The main theories of Milei Economics include negating the “minimal state” baseline, refusing to acknowledge market failure, and discarding the basic social security system; ideologizing economic theory to construct a binary opposition narrative of “market freedom versus state control”; regarding the development theory of the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) as “the shackles of economic sovereignty,” opposing the state-led development logic advocated by ECLAC; and denouncing Keynesianism as “the greatest fallacy in economics.”

在学术理论层面，米莱经济学完全吸纳反干预逻辑，将国家定义为“自由的敌人”，将反政府干预逻辑推向极致。米莱经济学的主要理论包括否定“最小政府”底线，拒绝承认市场失灵，摒弃基本社会保障体系；将经济理论意识形态化，构建“市场自由—国家控制”二元对立叙事；将拉美经委会发展主义理论视为“经济主权的枷锁”，反对拉美经委会倡导的国家主导发展逻辑；斥责凯恩斯主义是“经济学的最大谬误”。

The policy program of Milei Economics centers on “privatization, liberalization, dollarization,” and its concrete implementation exhibits the characteristics of “shock therapy.” For example, in fiscal policy, it streamlines federal government agencies, cuts federal public employees, and eliminates the federal government’s fiscal deficit. In monetary policy, it promotes the depreciation of the local currency and sets “dollarization” as a medium-term goal. In market policy, it comprehensively relaxes import controls, abolishes more than 200 economic regulatory policy measures, plans to sell 41 state-owned enterprises, opens strategic resources such as lithium mines and shale oil and gas to foreign investment, and grants 30-year tax incentives. In social policy, it cancels energy and transportation subsidies, relaxes labor market regulations, and cuts social security and development expenditures.

米莱经济学的政策纲领以“私有化、自由化、美元化”为核心，具体实施呈现“休克疗法”特征。比如，在财政政策上，精简联邦政府机构，裁减联邦公职人员，消除联邦政府财政赤字。在货币政策上，推动本币贬值，将“美元化”作为中期目标。在市场政策上，全面放松进口管制，废除200余项经济管制政策措施，计划出售41家国企，向外资开放锂矿、页岩油气等战略资源并给予30年税收优惠。在社会政策上，取消能源、交通补贴，放松劳动力市场管制，削减社会保障和发展支出等。

Policy Dilemmas Expose the Crisis of the Neoliberal Paradigm

政策困境暴露新自由主义范式危机

Although Milei’s radical reforms have achieved some results in the short term, these are built on the basis of severely damaging the economic foundation and sacrificing people’s livelihoods. At present, the long-term negative effects of Milei’s economic reforms have already become prominent, once again confirming the paradigm crisis of neoliberalism.

尽管米莱的激进改革短期内取得了部分成效，但其建立在严重损害经济根基、牺牲民生福祉的基础上。目前，米莱经济改革的长期负面效应业已凸显，再一次印证了新自由主义的范式危机。

First, the imbalance in the distribution of land and resource revenues has triggered multiple conflicts. Argentina, as a country dependent on primary products, has a property rights structure where land is privately owned and resources belong to provincial governments, which sharply collides with the Milei government’s radical reform of “privatization and liberalization.” Struggles over the distribution rights of land and resource revenues have gradually intensified conflicts between agriculture and land, labor and capital, and the central and provincial governments. The Argentine Constitution stipulates that mineral resources belong to provincial governments, but the Milei government, in exchange for attracting foreign capital inflows and fiscal revenue, pushed for “resources to be owned by the state” through emergency economic decrees. The governor of Chubut Province publicly stated, “Unless Milei sends troops, we will not hand over a single piece of lithium ore.” The conflict between the federal government and provincial governments over the distribution of resource revenues has escalated from policy disputes to administrative confrontation, severely disrupting the national governance order.

其一，土地与资源收益分配失衡引发多重冲突。阿根廷作为初级产品依赖型国家，土地私人所有、资源归省政府所有的产权格局，与米莱政府“私有化、自由化”的激进改革形成尖锐碰撞。围绕土地、资源收益分配权的争夺，农地矛盾、劳资矛盾、央地矛盾逐渐激化。阿根廷宪法规定，矿产资源归省政府所有，但米莱政府为换取外资流入与财政收入，通过紧急经济法令推动“资源归公”，丘布特省省长公开表态，“除非米莱派兵前来，否则绝不交出一块锂矿石”。联邦政府与省政府围绕资源收益分配的矛盾已从政策争议升级为行政对抗，严重破坏了国家治理秩序。

Second, the loss of social equity and the structural differentiation of poverty. Mainly influenced by the decline in the inflation rate, from the first half of 2024 to the first half of 2025, Argentina’s poverty rate (the proportion of the poor in the total population) fell from 52.9% to 31.6%, and the extreme poverty rate (the proportion of the absolutely poor in the total population) fell from 18.1% to 6.9%. From the perspective of absolute poverty, the impact of Milei’s reforms on society exhibits the characteristic of “short-term relief coexisting with long-term deterioration.” In the short term, the decline in inflation has temporarily lifted some of the extremely poor out of absolute poverty, but this improvement lacks sustainable support. In the long term, the radical austerity policies of the reforms have caused deep damage to the social structure, leading to the prominence of the “intractability” of absolute poverty. One of the main reasons is the severe imbalance in the distribution of benefits, falling back into the quagmire of “5% of the rich benefiting while the vast majority of the people suffer.” Rising costs of basic public services and the weakening of the public security system will make the alleviation of absolute poverty unsustainable, further exacerbating social instability.

其二，社会公平丧失与贫困结构分化。主要受通胀水平下降的影响，2024年上半年至2025年上半年，阿根廷贫困率（贫困人口占总人口比重）由52.9%降至31.6%，赤贫率（绝对贫困人口占总人口比重）由18.1%降至6.9%。从绝对贫困状况来看，米莱改革对社会的冲击呈现“短期缓解与长期恶化并存”的特征。短期来看，通胀下降让部分赤贫人口暂时脱离绝对贫困，但这一改善缺乏可持续支撑。长期来看，改革的激进紧缩政策已对社会结构造成深层破坏，导致绝对贫困的“顽固性”凸显，主要原因之一是利益分配严重失衡，重陷“5%富人受益、绝大多数民众受损”泥沼。基本公共服务成本上涨、公共保障体系弱化将使绝对贫困的缓解效果难以持续，进一步加剧社会不稳定。

Third, high debt pressure and comprehensive loss of autonomy. According to statistics from Argentina’s Ministry of Economy, as of November 2025, the total debt balance of the Argentine federal government was approximately $442.2 billion, of which the external debt balance was approximately $145.7 billion. In 2026, the principal and interest repayment amount of the Argentine federal government’s debt is approximately $100.6 billion, of which the maturing external debt principal is approximately $7.5 billion. Although the pressure to repay external debt is relatively small, due to the heavy debt burden, Argentina is highly dependent on external financing to maintain the sustainability of the federal government’s debt. Furthermore, Argentina has long been excluded from international capital markets. To obtain external financing, it is forced to accept the strict constraints of external creditors. For example, in exchange for a $20 billion loan from the International Monetary Fund, it accepted the IMF’s rigid terms, committing to a fiscal deficit not exceeding 1.5% of GDP; in exchange for $20 billion in aid from the Trump administration, it “offered up” Argentina’s strategic resources and military security to the United States. This vicious cycle of “high debt pressure – external dependence – ceding sovereignty” deeply binds Argentina’s economic sovereignty, fiscal sovereignty, and even development sovereignty, continuously squeezing its space for autonomous development and exacerbating the country’s development vulnerability.

其三，债务高压与自主性全面失守。根据阿根廷经济部的统计，截至2025年11月，阿根廷联邦政府债务余额约为4422亿美元，其中外债余额约为1457亿美元。2026年阿根廷联邦政府的债务本息偿还额约为1006亿美元，其中到期外债本金约为75亿美元。尽管外债偿还压力较小，但由于债务负担过重，阿根廷高度依赖外部融资，维持联邦政府债务的可持续性。此外，阿根廷早已被排除在国际资本市场之外，为了获得外部融资，只能被迫接受外部债权人的严苛约束。例如，为换取国际货币基金组织200亿美元贷款，接受该组织的刚性条款，阿根廷承诺财政赤字不超过国内生产总值的1.5%；为了换取特朗普政府200亿美元的援助，将阿根廷的战略资源、军事安全“奉送”给美国。这种“债务高压—外部依赖—主权出让”的恶性循环，使得阿根廷的经济主权、财政主权乃至发展主权被深度绑定，自主发展空间被持续挤压，加剧国家发展脆弱性。

Warnings for Economic Reform in Developing Countries

对发展中国家经济改革的警示

The practice of Milei Economics is an extreme experiment of neoliberalism, and the problems it has exposed provide three key warnings for economic reform in developing countries.

米莱经济学的实践是新自由主义的极端化实验，其暴露出的问题为发展中国家经济改革提供了三重关键警示。

First, be wary of the trap of ideologization. Milei treated neoliberalism as the “only truth,” using a binary opposition narrative to obscure the essence of economic problems, ultimately leading reforms to deviate from national conditions. Developing countries need to discard the one-sided cognition of “market omnipotence” or “government omnipotence,” refuse to use economic theory as a tool for ideological struggle, and seek a dynamic balance between market and government, efficiency and fairness.

第一，警惕意识形态化陷阱。米莱将新自由主义奉为“唯一真理”，通过二元对立叙事掩盖经济问题本质，最终导致改革脱离国情。发展中国家需摒弃“市场万能”或“政府全能”的片面认知，拒绝将经济理论作为意识形态斗争工具，在市场与政府、效率与公平间寻求动态平衡。

Second, be wary of the trap of policy extremism. Neoliberal tools need to be used in moderation and matched with social security buffers. Milei’s policy measures, such as extreme austerity, thorough privatization, excessive cuts in public spending, and abandonment of industrial autonomy, will only lead to the deterioration of people’s livelihoods and dependent development. The reforms of developing countries need to be based on their own capacity to bear the costs, constructing a coordination mechanism of “reform intensity – social buffer – livelihood security.”

第二，警惕政策极端化陷阱。新自由主义工具需适度运用并配套社会保障缓冲，米莱的极端紧缩、彻底私有化、过度削减公共支出、放弃产业自主等政策措施，只会导致民生恶化与依附性发展。发展中国家的改革需立足自身承受能力，构建“改革力度—社会缓冲—民生保障”的协同机制。

Third, be wary of the trap of theoretical dogmatism. Any economic theory needs to be adapted to a country’s own endowments. Milei mechanically applied Austrian School theory, ignoring Argentina’s dependent economic structure and social contradictions, leading to the paradox of “good-looking macro data but hardship in people’s lives.” Compared with Chile’s “Chicago Boys” reform, it lacks stable political consensus and social buffer mechanisms, further amplifying the harm of dogmatism. Developing countries should adhere to pragmatism, construct an autonomous development theory based on national conditions, and hold the bottom line of economic sovereignty, macroeconomic equilibrium, and social equity.

第三，警惕理论教条主义陷阱。任何经济理论都需与本国禀赋适配，米莱机械套用奥地利学派理论，无视阿根廷依附性经济结构与社会矛盾，导致“宏观数据好看、民众生活困苦”的悖论。与智利“芝加哥男孩”改革相比，其缺乏稳定的政治共识与社会缓冲机制，进一步放大了教条化危害。发展中国家应坚持务实主义，立足国情构建自主发展理论，坚守经济主权、宏观均衡与社会公平的底线。

(The author is a research fellow at the Institute of Latin American Studies, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, and a professor at the School of International Politics and Economics, University of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.)

（作者系中国社会科学院拉丁美洲研究所研究员、中国社会科学院大学国际政治经济学院教授）