The front-runner heading into Argentina’s presidential vote on Oct. 22 is prone to wielding a chain saw – both physically and metaphorically.

Javier Milei, a right-wing libertarian whose brash demagoguery has drawn comparisons to Donald Trump and Brazil’s former President Jair Bolsonaro, likes to brandish the power tool at campaign events as a symbol of what he intends to do if elected: cut back on government.

Milei has promised to take his chain saw to the ministries of education, environment and women’s rights, to name but a few, and to ax funding for scientific research. The country’s central bank would also cease to exist, if Milei fulfills his pledge to “dollarize” Argentina’s economy – that is, to scrap the country’s peso and replace it with the U.S. currency.

Milei promises a radical change to Argentina’s current trajectory. And his attacks on science and education form part of a troubling anti-intellectual, right-wing populism that threatens liberal democracies worldwide.

However, as an expert on the history of public health in Argentina, I believe Milei could face stiff resistance if he tries to undo a long-standing consensus on the need for the government to provide universal health care and other social services.

A shock to the political system

A former economics professor, Milei is a relative political newcomer, having served just one term in the national congress. As with other right-wing populists, he casts himself as a political outsider.

When it comes to public spending, Milei styles himself as an “anarcho-capitalist.” His plans include eliminating both the Ministry of Health and Conicet, the agency that funds most academic research in Argentina, and folding them into a new Ministry of Human Capital, with a fraction of their current budget and personnel.

Milei’s rhetoric taps into a deep well of discontent among Argentinians with the current government led by Alberto Fernandez, a member of the Peronist party, which has held power for most of the past three decades.

Since assuming power in 2019, Fernandez has presided over runaway inflation, rising poverty and accusations of official corruption.

The government’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic saw an initial boost in public support for Fernandez. But by the middle of 2021, frustration with the government was starting to boil over – due in part to accusations of preferential priority for COVID-19 vaccinations for Peronist officials and their friends and families.

Meanwhile, for Milei, the pandemic proved to be a catalyst for his rise to political fame. Fanning the flames of public discontent, he appeared frequently on television and in social media to call out a “political caste” for imposing what he deemed unnecessary and economically damaging pandemic restrictions. His popularity has since skyrocketed among young people in Argentina, attuned to “anti-progressive” messaging online and exhausted by economic crisis and political corruption. Milei polls much better among men, in part because many women are alarmed by his intention to reverse the country’s 2021 legalization of abortion.

Health as a social right

Evidently, Milei has tapped into a thirst for sweeping political change.

But there is reason to believe that his proposals to reduce the government’s role in the health sector would run into strong headwinds, given the longer-term pattern in Argentina and across the Latin America region.

Today, there is a broad public acceptance of a strong role for government in guaranteeing and protecting the right to health care, along with other “social rights” like education and gender equality.

As I explain in my new book, “In Pursuit of Health Equity,” a hemispheric “social medicine” movement has, over the past century, played a key role in the construction of welfare state institutions in many Latin American countries. Led by progressive doctors, left-wing academics and health activists, social medicine – which sees health as being intrinsically tied to socio-economic factors – has sought to build robust health systems as part of a strong social safety net. Social medicine advocates see health as a right rather than a commodity.

In Argentina, Juan Domingo Perón, the founder of the populist Peronist movement that Milei now hopes to dislodge from power, understood social medicine. To make Argentina’s population healthier and more productive, in the 1940s Perón expanded the government’s role in health care while advancing policies to improve labor conditions, nutrition and housing.

Later, politically active academics took on prominent roles in health planning in the leftist governments of Brazil, Argentina and Bolivia in the late 1990s and early 2000s, opposing market-based reforms and the incursion of a U.S. health care model that critics say puts profit over people.

Healthy approval ratings

Milei’s popularity suggests another swing in the pendulum of Latin American politics, which has tended to oscillate between state-centered and free-market-oriented models.

Clearly, a large contingent of Argentine voters agree with his basic contention that the current government has provoked an economic crisis with overly generous spending.

Yet his more extreme proposals are likely to meet resistance.

As Argentinian scholar Maria Laura Cordero and I found in our survey during the pandemic, Argentinians have mostly positive feelings toward public health institutions and the people who work in them, coupled with intense disdain for the political class. Around 67% of those we surveyed approved of the performance of the health sector, compared with 22% approval of political leadership during the pandemic.

Dismantling the public health sector in favor of market mechanisms like a voucher system to pay for health care or putting public hospitals in competition with one another, as Milei has suggested, may prove to be unpopular.

There is broad consensus about a fundamental right to health care in Argentina, as elsewhere in Latin America. And the public, by and large, understands that government intervention is necessary to make health care accessible to the poor and to respond to public health emergencies like the recent pandemic.

Health workers, deeply invested in the precepts of social medicine, are sure to resist Milei’s attempts at health reform. In response to Milei’s plans, the president of the Argentine Public Health Association stated that “solidarity and the building of the common good are present in the DNA” of health personnel in Argentina. The public is also likely to worry at the prospect of increased fees and the lack of coverage for basic health care needs.

Research under attack

Milei hasn’t won anything yet, nor is there a clear rightward tilt in Latin American politics – in the past two years, leftist presidential candidates have prevailed in countries as varied as Brazil, Chile, Colombia and Guatemala. But even if he fails to push through his radical agenda, the rhetoric of his campaign could serve to undermine confidence in Argentina’s health and science institutions.

Milei capitalizes on the politics of resentment, vilifying “unproductive” researchers who receive support from Conicet, especially social science and humanities scholars.

Such attacks on government support for scientific research, health care and education are consistent with a global right-wing ideology, typified by the likes of Viktor Orban of Hungary or Ron DeSantis, a Republican presidential candidate in the U.S.

Within the bottom-line mentality of neoliberalism – a political ideology that preaches free-market reforms over state involvement – such research is seldom viewed as profitable, nor does it tend to offer the possibility of new therapies or technologies produced by “hard” sciences and modern biomedicine.

But as the history of Latin American social medicine shows, social scientists can counter that, with time, their approach has helped build more just, free and healthy societies. And that legacy is now at stake as Argentinians head toward the polls.

  • ANIMATEK@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    1 year ago

    I don’t think the author understands Argentinian politics or even Milei’s proposals.

    He does not want to end public health care or public education, but rather the overly generous system in place. If you are a foreigner visiting the country, you can get both for free. That’s nuts, that’s the average taxpayer subsidizing your holidays or education. Of course we have a lot of people coming from all over South America to study and leave.

    Milei also is not attacking science, but the author seems to interpret his desire to reshuffle the CONICET as the issue. This used to be a very serious and science focused entity that nowadays has been a public laugh since some studies over movies like Star Wars and The Lion King between other crap were made public. People don’t like their tax money spent in this bs.

    And his most important proposal, barely mentioned here, is to dollarize to end inflation and prevent future governments to increase spending again (i.e. print money). Countries that have done this are proof that this works.

    The author also seems to look at Perón through some pink glasses, when in reality the country problems (huge spending, protectionism) started with him in power and have plagued Argentinian politics ever since. He was also a dictator and a pedophile.

    More than 6 out of 10 Argentinians work for the Government in some way. Some services companies have over 100% taxation, look it up. Go cry to your first world country with this bullshit piece of journalism.

    • potustheplant@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Funny that you mention someone elses ignorance and then go on to say that CONICET is not a serious investigation organism. I presonally know very intelligent doing good work there with the very scarce resources they are given.

      On top of that, Milei’s ““reasoning”” is that the private sector should be the one that funds this type institution. Good luck getting private companies to fund pollution studies for example. Having a good state funded scientific research center is incredibly valuable.

      • PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Sure, but its valuable to dirty poor people. Privitisation is valuable to the wealthy.

        Honestly, he sounds like a pretty generic right wing politician to me.

        Wants to cut public services to the bone because he doesn’t need them nor have any respect for those who do. His solution involves letting the private sector charge twice the cost for half the service with the wealthy skimming as much as they can off the top before the inevitable collapse and bail out.

        Sure, he’s put the pig in a different dress to round up the reactionary, idiot and religious nutjob votes but under it is still the same bullshit neoliberalism that has been failing the 99% for decades.

        • potustheplant@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          100%

          Regardless, he has 0 political structure behind him to push his dumb ideas to fruition and no resources to actually dollarize the economy. He’ll either lose or retire before completing his term.

    • amenotef@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I don’t think that switching to USD is the best solution. But at least it should limit the ridiculous amount of money printed. The inflation in Argentina is crazy.

      In Spain if we were the only owners of the Euro we would be printing money to solve absolutely any problem. Generating even more inflation.

      • FireTower@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I agree I wonder what his reasoning is for changing to the dollar over say going backed by gold or silver.

        • amenotef@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          USD It is the second most popular currency in Argentina.

          And the first choice for savings.

          (I’d prefer EUR rather than USD as it’s more decentralised).

      • ANIMATEK@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Biggest example is Ecuador. Since adopting the dollar in 2000 they have sometimes even lower inflation that the US itself. Also when Correa was elected he could not increase spend like crazy because he lacked monetary authority. He even acknowledged that and said that the dollarization was an error LOL. He still managed to fuck the economy, but arguably it could have been a lot worse.

    • guajojo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      You’re wasting time brother, the article is propaganda fueled by people outside of the Argentinean reality.