Geoff Russ: Javier Milei understands the need for power
"If we don't have it, then the left will have it."
“There are many liberals, libertarians and anarcho-capitalists who are really useless because all they do is criticise, let’s say, those of us who want to lead the world toward the ideas of freedom. And what they don’t realise is that power is a zero-sum game, and if we don’t have it, then the left will have it. Therefore, if you level your harshest criticism at those in your own ranks, you end up being subservient.”
Have truer words ever been spoken by an English-speaking politician?
Argentine President Javier Milei’s words on the Lex Fridman podcast were a blunt reminder of something that many conservatives, particularly those in Canada, have chosen to forget.
Politics is the pursuit of political power and the chance to use it before your opponents can. Debates can be won, superb essays published, and quotes recycled from deceased politicians. Without power, however, it all amounts to nothing more than a glorified brainstorming session.
The thoughtful ideas and proposals go to waste if they lie stagnant in perpetual bickering opposition.
On October 26, Milei won a resounding victory in the legislative elections. His party, Liberty Advances, gained forty-two seats and smashed the hard-left Peronists who have dominated Argentina’s politics for more than half a century.
Milei is a fanatical believer in libertarian ideas, and has never pretended to be a moderate or incrementalist. He famously brandishes a chainsaw to represent his willingness to destroy the broken socialist status quo of Argentina.
The rise of Milei has been a cultural battle for the soul of the country, and he is not shy about it. Milei leads a fresh, winning anti-Peronist coalition of forgotten and angry Argentines who want permanent, radical change.
It may be tempting to view Milei’s success as a pure affirmation of the appeal of libertarian ideology, but he is hardly Argentina’s first advocate of economic freedom. He succeeds because he is the opposite of a polite, centre-right reformer. Milei unapologetically embraces his place as a culture warrior seeking to remake the nation.
One of his targets is the institutional decadence and incompetence of the Peronist political machine. By swearing to snuff it out, Milei swept through traditional Peronist strongholds, whose voters had never considered voting for the formerly toothless Argentine opposition.
Milei’s triumphs have earned him many admirers in Canada, but their numbers are dwarfed by those who reserve their lion’s share of idolisation for American political leaders. This is an embarrassing phenomenon, but partially understandable. It is the result of the political mistakes and bad luck that have crippled the Canadian right since the Great Depression, leading to few world-renowned leaders.
This is why full-length essays praising the legacy of Ronald Reagan remain part of the modern Canadian conservative canon, even as the Republican Party itself has firmly moved on.
Holding principles is admirable and essential, as are imagination and a willingness to change. Nonetheless, prioritising economics in the name of respectability ironically betrays the legacy of Reagan.
Two essential pillars of Reagan’s mighty coalition were the blue-collar voters of the Midwest and the South. They were socially conservative patriots who despised being talked down to by Washington technocrats and high-minded liberal Democrats whom they had once loyally supported.
The Reagan Democrats crossed the aisle because Reagan was a social conservative who opposed abortion, sought to crack down on crime, and launched his presidential run with a speech in Mississippi affirming his support for states’ rights.
It is true that one of Reagan’s greatest failures was his inability to reverse the left’s long march through American institutions, but he still understood the value of people who felt forgotten. This is the lesson that the Canadian right still resists.
Around the world, conservative voters are increasingly young, and motivated by cultural battles, national revival, and class realignment.
In Argentina, Milei has embarked on a historic run of spending cuts that are smashing the institutional bloat of the Peronists. This is what his country needs, and voters are rewarding him for it.
Canada needs a similar programme, and the Conservative Party has rightly zeroed in on this for the past decade, without winning a single federal election. Their tent does not have to grow much to reliably win at the federal level, but they must look in the right places.
The mythical “fiscally conservative, socially liberal” voter is a very small minority in Canada, dwarfed by cultural conservatives with mixed economic views.
These Canadians care deeply about the values that underpin their society. They are chronically under-represented in a country where 69.5 per cent voter turnout is considered to be impressive.
New allies are not found in the non-existent wellspring of classical liberals or disguised downtown progressives. They are found in the quiet people of Canada who want fairness, functional services, order, and a flag to rally around. Winning them over, and thereby winning power in a democracy, requires listening.
For example, the Conservative Party has a problem appealing to women, and for good reason. It is not because women are repelled by a programme of lower taxes, but because what looms larger is a lack of safety, stability, and protection from random attacks and break-ins in urban areas.
During the past year, over two-thirds of Canadian women have said they felt unsafe while out in public. They want action to tackle crime, addictions, and violence against women. Is turning a political programme into an advertisement for tax cuts the best way to show that women are being heard?
No mother walking to her car at night cares about the budget when the streetlight is flickering and dangerous, dishevelled men are milling about. The public safety, strong families, and recognisable local communities desired by the working and middle classes cannot be treated as mere accessories to economic policy.
This is a time when child sex abusers are breaking into homes in suburban Toronto to commit heinous crimes against minors, and the Supreme Court of Canada has just struck down mandatory minimum sentences for possessing child pornography. It is a sickening state of affairs that demands reform of the judiciary, and the federal purse strings that empower NGOs to pursue a left-wing culture war.
These are moral imperatives, and the conditions of trust born of security, belonging, and order make freedom meaningful. This is what animates the new right, and writing it off as a crass, online mob burns both a straw man and an olive branch.
Whatever the noise online, it is sparked by the serious anger of people who feel unheard by every major institution in this country. There is room in the same boat for both the new right and classical liberals, and the latter can and should be architects of fiscal sanity and a freer economy. Without allies, however, they will remain aspiring accountants instead of co-masters of the house.
At its core, politics is a battle to determine who governs and for what ends. The left deeply understands this and openly uses power to entrench its ideas into law, education, and cultural output. The right, on the other hand, pats itself on the back for allegedly “winning the argument” while the country dissolves from the inside out.
Javier Milei’s warning is prescient: if you do not have the power, somebody else will, and they will use it against you and your visions for the future.
Power is not granted to those who ask nicely. Milei knows both this, and the necessity of allies, and many on the Canadian right still need to as well.
Geoff Russ is the Editor-at-Large of Without Diminishment. He is a contributor to a number of publications, including the National Post, Modern Age, and The Spectator Australia.
