Critics are divided as Javier Milei takes gradual, constrained steps toward the radical free market he campaigned on.

In December 2023, as the sound of a chainsaw echoed through Buenos Aires, Javier Milei swept into the Casa Rosada, and pro-market Austrian School economists cheered his victory. Nearly three years later, many libertarians are disappointed. They keep asking themselves: Did they vote for Rothbard, only to get another central planner?

He campaigned on a platform that was not merely reformist but explicitly abolitionist. He promised to end the Central Bank, dollarize the economy, and rein in the interventionist state. The Central Bank of Argentina (BCRA) still opens its doors every morning. The government did not lift restrictions on moving foreign currencies until April 2025. To an orthodox libertarian, all of this might still look like central planning.

That criticism has divided free-market thinkers, including Austrian economists. Hans-Hermann Hoppe, for example, has criticized Milei for not acting radically enough. Milei responded sharply in an interview and accused Hoppe of lacking sufficient knowledge of monetary economics. Milei argued that the demands for immediate change ignore important risks, such as hyperinflation.

Milei believes that poorly timed good policy can lead to the worst outcome. He believes that the path to a free market must begin with ending persistent budget deficits, not lifting capital controls. He hopes this approach will advance his political agenda while limiting political tensions and inflation risk.

Milei’s background as a macroeconomist explains his thinking. In this sense, his approach is technocratic because he prioritizes the economic conditions needed to achieve his free-market goals, even if that requires more nuance than his ideological promises.

...read more at thedailyeconomy.org