Javier Milei describes himself as an anarcho-capitalist and a libertarian.

He campaigned on and has pledged aggressive fiscal tightening, including slashing state spending and reducing the fiscal deficit.

Milei has proposed abolishing or drastically cutting multiple ministries, with plans mentioned for education, health, women, and culture and claims of cutting about ten of 18 ministries.

He has proposed eliminating the Central Bank and dollarizing the Argentine economy.

Authorities under Milei devalued the peso sharply and have pursued moves toward a unified exchange rate while also cutting interest rates as part of stabilisation efforts.

He issued decrees that repealed or amended hundreds of laws to reduce union power and deregulate the economy, though courts have blocked some measures.

Milei has advanced plans to privatize state-owned enterprises and weaken labour protections.

He proposed a bill that would allow the executive delegation of lawmaking authority for economic emergencies and would penalize financing the deficit by issuing money.

A comprehensive reform bill granting wide executive powers was voted down by lawmakers.

His early shock measures buoyed markets but also provoked nationwide protests and strong opposition from trade unions.

Large street protests have been met with new public-order measures that permit federal forces to disperse protesters without a judicial order and to use video or digital evidence to identify participants, and that can assign security costs to protesters.

Milei faces significant legislative constraints because his La Libertad Avanza movement is a small force in Congress and he lacks governors and a congressional majority.

Analysts warn that full dollarization would cede monetary policy to the US Federal Reserve, increase vulnerability to external shocks, and likely require tens of billions of US dollars in reserves.

Milei has said his shock stabilisation could take up to two years to reduce inflation.

He has been compared in international media to figures such as Donald Trump and Jair Bolsonaro because of his style and radical proposals.

He has expressed controversial positions on Argentina’s 1976–83 dictatorship, contesting widely accepted casualty figures and framing the period as a two-sided conflict.

Milei has signalled scepticism about climate policies and proposed cutting or eliminating the environment ministry.

He has engaged provincial governors with a proposed 10-point social contract that includes renegotiating tax distribution between federal and provincial authorities.

Taken together, Milei’s agenda aims to shrink the state, deregulate markets, privatize services, and change monetary institutions, and these shifts have raised warnings about short-term social pain, increased exposure to external shocks, and institutional clashes with courts and Congress.

His political approach relies on executive decrees, shock therapy-style reforms, and confronting institutional opponents when legislative support is limited.

Milei’s measures have already produced visible economic adjustments, public-sector job cuts, and higher prices for services, which have contributed to social unrest and heated political debate.

In short, Milei is implementing a rapid, market-oriented dismantling of state roles while facing institutional limits, public protest, and economic uncertainty.

Overall, Milei’s policies are reshaping Argentina toward a smaller state and freer markets, but they carry substantial political and social risks in the near term.

Milei’s agenda reduces the role of the state, accelerates privatization and deregulation, pushes for monetary overhaul, and has triggered protests and institutional pushback.

In summary, Milei is pursuing radical libertarian economic and institutional reforms that shrink state functions and seek monetary change, but implementation faces legal, legislative, and social obstacles and may bring short-term economic pain.

Javier Milei describes himself as an anarcho-capitalist and a libertarian.

Title:

Content: Argentine President Pledges Economic Reform in a Passionate Speech to Congress | Deutsche Welle Introduces Germany | DW | 02.03.2024
1.
Inhalt
2.
Navigation
3.
Weitere Inhalte
4.
Metanavigation
5.
Suche
6.
Choose from 30 Languages
The political climate of the times
Argentine President vows to push for economic reform
In a speech to the National Assembly on Friday, Argentina's new president, Miguel Millay, vowed to continue to push for economic reform, whether or not he has the support of the National Assembly.
He said that if the economic model is not transformed, "Argentina has no future."
Milley told lawmakers he would continue to push through reforms with or without congressional support.
Argentina ’ s new liberal president, Javier Milei, delivered a passionate speech to Congress on Friday (March 1).
He said he "will continue to push" for economic reform.
The Argentine leader, who describes himself as an "anarcho-capitalist," promised to slash state spending and reduce the government's fiscal deficit.
“We ’ re going to completely change this country. ”
Millet told lawmakers that he would continue to push ahead with reforms, whether or not he had the support of Congress.
He said "we will not back down, we will continue to move forward...
Whether it is through laws, presidential decrees or amending regulations, "he added," We will change this country forever...
with or without the support of political leaders, with or without all the legal resources of the executive branch ".
"I ask for patience and trust... It will take a while for us to see the results of the economic restructuring and the reforms that are being implemented," he added.
If the economic model does not change, "Argentina has no future"
Millay said he would introduce a bill that would penalize anyone — including the president — who financed the deficit by issuing additional money.
When he takes office, Mile will devalue the peso by about half.
"If we don't fundamentally change the economic model, then Argentina has no future," he said.
How will Argentina choose between China and the EU?
Milley's speech was repeatedly interrupted by cheers from supporters, who told Congress they would face "another animal" if they opposed his reform efforts.
Miley's Shock Therapy
After taking office in December last year, Millet issued decrees repealing or amending hundreds of laws aimed at curtailing the power of trade unions and deregulating state interference in the economy.
However, his claims met with resistance, and the court issued a ruling halting these measures.
Miller proposed a comprehensive reform plan, seeking to privatize state-owned entities and weaken labor protection.
The bill was voted down by lawmakers last month.
It includes the power to delegate to the executive branch for one year and the power to pass laws by decree on the basis of "economic emergencies".
Millet ’ s shock economic measures boosted the market, but sparked nationwide protests and strong opposition from labor unions.
Trade unions say the reforms will hurt the poor.
Despite his harsh words to lawmakers, the Argentine president struck a more conciliatory tone in his interactions with governors, proposing a 10-point “social contract ” agreed by May 25 that includes a“ rediscussion ” of the current tax distribution between the federal government and provincial governors.
Mire and the provincial governors have also been at loggerheads over the issue of funding cuts.
This week, when the governor threatened to cut off energy supplies to the rest of Argentina due to a funding dispute, the dispute heated up.
(Reuters, Associated Press, Agence France-Presse)
© 2024 Deutsche Welle Copyright Notice: All content in this article is protected by copyright law and may not be used without special permission from Deutsche Welle.
Any misconduct will lead to recovery and criminal prosecution.

Title:

Content: Overview:

Argentina's latest presidential election offers plenty of sensational fodder for the presses. But there's a deeper issue here, a politics of desperation, that we would do well to watch as it rises in the world.

Reading Time: 6 minutes

On November 19, Argentina elected Javier Milei as its next president, to take office this December. His politics have been compared to those of Donald Trump (in his showmanship) and Jair Bolsonaro (in his rightwing extremism and denialism), but his ideas go further than both. Milei calls himself an anarcho-capitalist (a form of libertarian), whose stated aims are “blowing up” the central bank, changing the Argentinian peso for the dollar, permitting the private sale of human organs, and closing ministries for education, health, women, and culture while slashing welfare payments.

Milei has also been called a “minarchist” for his minimal-government belief that the state’s only purpose is to protect citizens’ rights to free action. To this end, proposed bans on abortion and loosened gun laws run in lockstep with his acceptance of trans identities and desire to legalize more drugs. He denies the scale of Argentina’s brutal history of state terror in 1976 to 1983, and when he first rose in the polls, there was a panicked rush among citizens to change their pesos for dollars, fearing economic disaster.

So why did he win?

And not just by a hair, but with 56% of the vote against his runoff opponent, Sergei Massa?

The historical underpinnings run deep, but human behavior in response to the current economic moment is also not complex. Urban poverty hit 40.1% in 2023, as inflation reached 50.7% earlier this year. When the official exchange rate was devalued by 22% the day after the primaries (in which Milei’s popularity caused panic), it caused a 12.4% inflation spike. This is in an enconomy where some 48.1% are informally or self-employed, and thus without salaried protections against the greatest financial hits.

An outsider expecting rational economic actors might assume that if Milei’s presence in the polls only destabilized an already precarious situation, surely humans would avoid voting for him again. But the logic of longstanding financial stress runs deeper than traditional economic configurations of the “rational actor”: when there is no confidence in existing state structures, perhaps it is best to pull off the bandaid quickly. The immediate pain will be hard, but maybe, just maybe, the destruction of the old order will bring about something new.

This is the politics of desperation and disillusionment.

The world would do well to pay attention to its rise.

Argentinian histories of low confidence in the state

There’s a famous, apocryphal, and above all cruel expression in economics: “There have only been four types of economies in the world: advanced, developing, Japan, and Argentina.” The point driven at here is that Japan seemed to rise from the ashes, with everything working against it, after World War II and even now with an aging workforce. Meanwhile Argentina, a country with a natural bounty, seemed to destroy confidence in itself at every turn.

This is a cruel expression for a few reasons: one being that Argentina is not alone even in South America, as a country with great internal resources that has struggled to turn its holdings into wealth for its citizens. Another reason is the why. While Japan recovered from WWII by growing a commercial empire through top-down industrial relationships with surrounding countries, Argentina under labor-nationalist Juan Domingo Perón had the audacity in the 1950s to try to nationalize its British-owned railways. This choice met with swift reprisal from Western powers, thereafter unwilling to invest. Before World War II, Argentina had relied heavily on military rule. After inflation spiked and labor strikes surged as global investors pulled out, it was back to decades of fraught authoritarianism.

One of the worst coups started with a 600 percent inflation surge in 1976. That seven-year period yielded up to 30,000 disappeared human beings during the state’s “Dirty War” against leftists, and ended only after the military attempted to take the Falkland Islands from the British. This failure would yield the modern democratic state, but with a low opinion of both the military and the bureaucracy. In 1989, ahead of a massive inflation crisis of up to 4,900 percent, only 30,000 out of 30 million citizens were paying income taxes.

Now, inflation can address domestic debt, but Argentina’s massive fiscal deficit was informed centrally by external debt, in dollars to the rest of the world. During the banking crisis of 1990, banks forced client deposits into bonds under the BONEX Plan, essentially taking citizens’ savings from them with a promise that their investment in the future of the country would pay off. Citizens were not happy about this, of course.

The government then introduced the Convertibility Plan in 1991, which tried to peg the Argentinian peso to the US dollar at a 1:1 rate. This process involved Argentina embracing US neoliberal state policies: relaxing labor protections, massively privatizing industries, and otherwise bringing the world back into Argentinian markets. Did the plan reduce inflation? Yes. It also raised unemployment, reduced wages, and stratified class outcomes. And it led to more austerity measures over time, because the government’s debt kept rising, forcing more of the annual budget into “debt servicing” to other countries.

Being open to world markets also meant being more vulnerable to their downturns, such as a major wobble in 2001, which sparked labor collapse and food riots in Argentina despite its local wealth of grain and beef. The peso was unpegged in 2002, after the government had restricted bank withdrawals to keep citizens from “financial flight” into other currencies and markets. Once the peso was floating freely, though, people panicked anyway. After years of seeing the dollar as the more valuable and stable currency, they rushed to exchange their holdings (which were now all in pesos) back into US dollars by other means. That rush caused another inflationary spike.

Argentina underwent two major debt restructuring deals in that decade, but they just created more problems. A deal in 2001 allowed Argentina to pay interest only to those who had opted in to the restructuring plan, and the exclusion of “holdouts” was reasserted after 2010, when the debt plan was agreed upon by 93% of bondholders. The remaining 7% weren’t having this, though: a few hedge fund creditors sued the Argentinian government for breach of a principle of equal treatment for bondholders, pari passu. The South District Court of New York agreed with them, and even though Argentina tried to continue paying its “holdin” creditors, as per the debt restructuring plan, those payments were not permitted until Argentina paid the holdouts, too, in compliance with the court’s rulings.

Argentina was forced into a massive default in 2014. And again in 2020. And this year, analysts believe it’s on track for another soon.

Why? Because Argentina’s banking system isn’t an independent force. It is yoked to a highly litigious set of international players, and vulnerable to every global market crash as well.

Seen this way, why wouldn’t the average Argentinian want to bring it down?

Dollarization and other flawed promises

The complex problem for Argentinians voting out of desperation is twofold:

For one, as much as they might associate the days of the dollar with a period of relative stability, it was never a simple matter of pegging one currency to another. The arrangement expressly came with Argentina’s willingness to embrace neoliberal policies that yielded stark divides in civilian life and other market outcomes. For Milei to “dollarize” the country now would require a similar willingness to play ball with international institutions and their policy demands. The moment the peso is eliminated, by being exchanged in its entirety for dollars, Argentina cedes a great deal of financial policy to external players.

And yet, that is precisely the issue currently plaguing Argentina’s banks.

But also, not just Argentina, despite the glibness of the apocryphal economics saying.

The problems of our global financial system are serious enough that they will require a much more holistic reckoning with the consequences of fifty years of neoliberal policy. In July, a UN joint commission released “Soaring Debt Threatens Global Prosperity”, a report that highlights the staggering rates of debt servicing endured by 40% of the developing world. If these debts were simply between states, that would be one matter, more easily resolved; but the hyper-privatized yet undertaxed nature of our global economy has the vast majority of these countries forced into austerity measures to pay off complex debts to groups like the hedge fund creditors who pushed Argentina into default in 2014.

In other words, this will keep happening until we develop policies that can offset the private-investment predation currently facing many countries in precarity.

The second problem is one that Colombia also experienced this past year, when many on both the left (with excitement) and the right (with trepidation) expected the first leftist president to bring about dramatic reforms: Milei is just one person in his government. Just as Gustavo Petro found himself embroiled in parliamentary quarrels between competing groups, so too does Milei’s victory not come with the resounding legislative presence needed to steamroll all his grand plans into operation. He, too, is going to have to negotiate.

In practice, this means that Argentinians currently thrilled by the possibility of change are again going to meet with disillusionment. Either Milei will pull off his dollarization, and they will learn that this move makes the country no less vulnerable to global shocks and creditors, or he won’t, and amid his interim achievement of “easier” goals (e.g., the demolition of whole ministries), Argentinians will experience socioeconomic shocks that again bring them to the streets in protest… or else to live, having nowhere else to go.

GLOBAL HUMANIST SHOPTALK M L Clark is a Canadian writer by birth, now based in Medellín, Colombia, who publishes speculative fiction and humanist essays with a focus on imagining a more just world.

He campaigned on and has pledged aggressive fiscal tightening, including slashing state spending and reducing the fiscal deficit.

Title:

Content: Milei Experiment

In the tangled web of Argentine politics and economics, one figure has emerged as both a lightning rod for controversy and a beacon of hope ~ President Javier Milei.

In the tangled web of Argentine politics and economics, one figure has emerged as both a lightning rod for controversy and a beacon of hope ~ President Javier Milei. His first 100 days in office have been marked by a whirlwind of fiscal manoeuvres, bold policy shifts, and commitment to economic reform. But as Argentina teeters on the edge of uncertainty, Mr Milei’s ambitious agenda raises questions even it offers solutions. At the heart of Mr Milei’s strategy lies a radical departure from conventional wisdom.

Brandishing a chainsaw as a symbol of fiscal austerity, he has pledged to slash spending and achieve a budget surplus, a feat unheard of in a country plagued by decades of fiscal mismanagement. His unorthodox approach has garnered both praise and scepticism, as Argentines grapple with the harsh realities of rising poverty and economic contraction. The cornerstone of Mr Milei’s economic vision is the elimination of money-printing and the pursuit of a unified exchange rate. By devaluing the peso and cutting interest rates, he aims to rein in inflation and restore confidence in the economy.

Yet the path to stability is fraught with pitfalls, as the spectre of recession looms large and investors remain wary of the government’s opaque monetary policies. While Mr Milei’s commitment to reform is commendable, his political isolation poses a significant obstacle to meaningful change. With little support in the Argentine Congress and a fragmented coalition, he faces an uphill battle. The recent defeat of a sprawling omnibus bill highlights the challenges ahead, as competing interests and entrenched political factions threaten to derail Mr Milei’s ambitions. Moreover, the uncertainty surrounding Argentina’s future monetary regime adds another layer of complexity to the equation. Will Mr Milei pivot towards dollarization or pursue a more gradual approach to currency reform? The lack of clarity on this front only serves to fuel investor anxieties and exacerbate economic volatility. Amidst these challenges, Mr Milei’s fate hangs in the balance. How much economic pain can Argentines endure before turning on their unconventional leader? And can Mr Milei muster the political support needed to navigate the treacherous waters of Argentine politics?

Advertisement

In the end, the trajectory of Mr Milei’s presidency hinges on the delicate balance between economic resilience and political manoeuvring. Should he manage to maintain public support and secure crucial alliances, Mr Milei could emerge as a formidable force in next year’s mid-term elections. However, any slip in popularity could spell disaster for his ambitious agenda, opening the door for his adversaries to dismantle his presidency. Whether Mr Milei’s gamble will pay off remains to be seen. But one thing is certain. In a country accustomed to political upheaval and economic turmoil, the journey towards reform is bound to be fraught with uncertainty and adversity. Only time will tell whether Mr Milei’s vision for Argentina’s future will lead to prosperity or further hardship

Advertisement

What economic issue did Milei want to address?

What issue did Milei want to address without printing money?

What economic issue did Milei want to address?

What issue did Milei want to address without printing money?

Milei has proposed abolishing or drastically cutting multiple ministries, with plans mentioned for education, health, women, and culture and claims of cutting about ten of 18 ministries.

Title:

Content: Argentina sees the light with Maverick Javier Milei – Ivo Vegter

In a surprising turn, libertarian firebrand Javier Milei secured Argentina’s presidency after a second-round victory against his left-wing rival. Vowing to end decades of socialist mismanagement, Milei, an outspoken economist, faces challenges in implementing radical reforms, including abolishing ministries and dollarising the economy. While hailed as the world’s first libertarian president, Milei’s uphill battle involves legislative opposition and managing economic pain amid promises of a freer, market-oriented Argentina. Skepticism remains, awaiting the true impact of his ambitious plans in a nation grappling with deep-rooted economic struggles.

Sign up for your early morning brew of the BizNews Insider to keep you up to speed with the content that matters. The newsletter will land in your inbox at 5:30am weekdays. Register here.

Argentinians see the light

By Ivo Vegter*

It took a second round of voting, but the libertarian Javier Milei has defeated his Peronist rival to become president of Argentina.

A month ago, Javier Milei unexpectedly lost the first round of the Argentinian general election to his left-wing Peronist rival, Sergio Massa, after the latter had cynically promised zero taxes as a way to bribe voters.

In my column on the lessons South Africa could draw from that election, I said: ‘Let’s hope Argentinians see the light before Massa and Milei face off in the run-off election.’

Happily, they did see the light.

After decades of economic malaise under a government that for most of the last 30 years has been socialist, corrupt, wasteful and incompetent, leaving Argentina eighth from last in the Fraser Institute’s Economic Freedom of the World Report 2023, they elected Milei, a libertarian firebrand, in the biggest landslide since Juan Perón’s election in 1973.

Milei becomes the first libertarian president, not only of Argentina, but in the world. The closest precedent that comes to mind is that of Calvin Coolidge, the small-government conservative president during the Roaring Twenties in the US, but Milei is far more radical than that.

‘“oday the reconstruction of Argentina begins’, he said, after winning 56% of the vote in the head-to-head race. That was also his first lie as president-elect, since he doesn’t actually take office until 10 December, but we’ll let that slide.

Radical

To describe Milei as radical would be putting it mildly. He has described the country’s ruling elite as thieves and the government as ‘a criminal organisation’. He has promised to abolish ten of the government’s 18 ministries. He said he would do away with the central bank and dollarise the Argentinian economy.

‘The model of decadence has come to an end’, he told his supporters. ‘There’s no going back. We have monumental problems ahead. Inflation, lack of work, and poverty’.

Milei is an accomplished economist, and largely follows the Austrian School of individualist free-market economics. He has variously described himself as an anarcho-capitalist and a minarchist (an anarchist who accepts the legitimacy of a small government dedicated to protecting life, liberty and property).

He has been extraordinarily outspoken on the evils of socialism and statism, and how they turned Argentina from a once-wealthy world power into an over-indebted, poverty-stricken, underdeveloped basket case.

Mainstream media

The mainstream media, with its largely left-leaning bias, has compared Milei to former presidents Donald Trump of the US and Jair Bolsonaro of Brazil.

‘Argentina set for sharp right turn as Trump-like radical wins presidency’, trumpeted the Washington Post

‘Argentina Elects Javier Milei in Victory for Far Right’ was the headline in the New York Times, which added: ‘Argentina’s next president is a libertarian economist whose brash style and embrace of conspiracy theories has parallels with those of Donald J. Trump.’

The ‘embrace of conspiracy theories’ is a particularly vicious jab. Readers would have to follow a link to find an explanation, and it turns out that the Times only referred to Milei’s allegations of polling irregularities, which have not been tested.

It is entirely plausible that Argentina’s electoral system is less secure than that of the United States, and that the incumbents – who went as far as abolishing taxes in order to engineer a win – might have been involved in some electoral skulduggery.

Allegations of election fraud are very common on all sides of the political spectrum, and do not, in and of themselves, rise to the level of the debunked claims of Trump, and his attempt to derail the orderly election of his rival.

Authoritarians

More importantly, both Bolsonaro and Trump are alt-right populists. They are moral authoritarians – not liberals – and appeal to collectivist – not individualist – principles such as nationalism and protectionism. They have often, rightly, been described as fascist, which is just as antithetical to libertarians as is left-wing socialism.

That both former presidents expressed their support for Milei has a lot more to do with shared anti-socialist positions than any real congruence in their political philosophy.

Milei has himself rejected the right-wing label, and indeed, his classical liberalism (for which ‘libertarian’ in the American sense is a synonym) does not yield to a simplistic left-right analysis. Rather, it falls on the liberal end of an authoritarian-liberal scale, and on the progressive end of a conservative-progressive scale.

Sour-grape-ish

Milei does have some views that are questionable, or traditionally associated with the conservative right, such as his anti-abortion stance and his rejection of climate alarmism.

Neither define him, however, and both are issues on which libertarians can and do disagree.

By similar logic, Milei’s promise not to dismantle Argentina’s extensive social welfare programmes does not make him some sort of left-winger.

In focusing on incidental agreements between Milei and leaders like Trump and Bolsonaro, and ignoring the fundamental philosophical differences between the former’s individualist, free-market, small-government ideas and the authoritarianism, nationalism, populism and protectionism of the latter, the media does both Milei and their readers a great disservice.

That a politician does not perfectly reflect all one’s personal political or moral views is in any case far less of a concern when that very politician proposes as far as possible to keep government out of people’s personal affairs and to leave most of the world’s problems to the private sector.

‘When your response to everything that is wrong with the world is to say, “There ought to be a law,” you are saying that you hold freedom very cheap’, said Thomas Sowell.

Moreover, it seems extraordinarily petty and sour-grape-ish to complain about a few differences of opinion with a candidate who promises radical change in a country that is mired in economic crisis, thanks to the policies of its incumbent rulers.

Music to the ears

Sniping from the mainstream press aside, the rise of a truly libertarian president in one of the world’s most economically unfree countries should be music to a classical liberal’s ears.

Who doesn’t want to radically slash the size of government? Who doesn’t question the inflationary monetary policy of highly indebted countries? Who doesn’t want to see free enterprise flourish, and witness the departure of a government that strangles business with red tape and taxes, and tries to pick winners by throwing subsidies at favoured companies?

On the face of it, this should be an excellent experiment to show whether the libertarian prescriptions for government do, indeed, produce a better outcome than the socialist quagmire in which Argentina has been stuck for so long.

Pain and gain

Practically speaking, however, there are reasons to remain skeptical.

First, we’ve only seen Milei’s talk, and not his walk.

Second, making drastic changes in the structure of a country’s government and economy, as Milei proposes, will be painful.

It is arguable that the short-term pain is justified by the long-term gain, but electorates are rarely forgiving to those who inflict necessary pain. Witness Margaret Thatcher, who saved Britain from the socialist economic malaise of the 1970s, but remains hated to this day by those who bore the brunt of her reforms.

Dollarising an economy does not produce immediate results, for example. It can take years before the stabilising effect of dollarisation filters through to low inflation rates. It can, however, immediately harm people and even increase poverty levels, depending on the exchange rate at which existing deposits are converted.

Drastically reducing the size of government will also face much immediate opposition, especially from civil servants who stand to lose their jobs.

Privatising healthcare, education or other government functions is also fraught with transition difficulties. Much depends on exactly how such privatisation is carried out. It can fail, and even if the eventual outcome is a success, it could cause years of disruptions and dissatisfaction.

Then there are the entrenched patronage networks of the incumbent socialist government, who will be highly upset – and fight back vigorously – when the taps of corrupt fiscal spending get turned off.

Finally, few voters have the patience to wait five or ten years for radical free-market reforms to have a positive impact, and Argentina’s president only serves a four-year term before facing the electorate again.

Legislative opposition

A further obstacle to Milei’s reforms is that he will not be the philosopher-king of every libertarian’s dreams. He will not be a dictator.

He will simply be the head of the executive in a constitutional parliamentary democracy, with strictly circumscribed powers.

And the elections did not result in a similar landslide in the legislature.

Argentina has a 72-seat Senate, or upper house, and a 257-seat Chamber of Deputies, or lower house. Together, they make up the Argentinian National Congress.

In both houses, Milei’s libertarian coalition, Liberty Advances (La Libertad Avanza, or LLA) took more seats from the conservative coalition, Together for Change (Juntos por el Cambio, or JxC), than from the socialist Peronista coalition, Union for the Homeland (Unión por la Patria, or UxP).

In the Senate, this leaves the Peronistas as the largest coalition, with 32 seats. It would need 37 seats to command an outright majority. The conservative coalition, JxC, retains only 27 seats. As the third-largest party in the Senate, Milei’s LLA only has six seats, which even in coalition with the conservatives is not enough for an outright majority.

In the lower house, the picture is similar. UxP has 104 out of 257 seats, JxC has 93, and LLA has 38. The only difference is that here, a JxC and LLA coalition can command a simple majority.

This leaves Milei at the mercy first of the conservatives, who would welcome market-oriented reforms and a departure from socialism, but by their very nature would be reluctant to endorse Milei’s more radical, disruptive proposals. Once Milei has cleared that hurdle, he needs to gather a majority in the upper house, which will be even harder.

Argentina is also heavily indebted, including to the International Monetary Fund, and creditors are likely to have a say in how the country is run. Anything that scares them will raise the cost of credit, which Argentina can ill afford.

Wait and see

Once the initial euphoria of seeing a true libertarian in power has cleared, then, we are left with the sobering realisation that Milei may not be able to achieve anywhere near as much as he has promised.

Turning failing countries around is not for the faint-hearted, and it always comes with social upheaval and economic pain.

Even if Milei gets the good ship Argentina pointed in the right direction again, the prevailing winds and currents may still dash it – and its captain – upon the rocks.

Read also:

*Ivo Vegter is a freelance journalist, columnist and speaker who loves debunking myths and misconceptions, and addresses topics from the perspective of individual liberty and free markets.

This article was first published by Daily Friend and is republished with permission

Visited 57 times, 57 visit(s) today

He has proposed eliminating the Central Bank and dollarizing the Argentine economy.

Title:

Content: Argentina election: Javier Milei's radical proposals face test of reality

  • Oops!
    Something went wrong.
    Please try again later.

Javier Milei, the anti-establishment politician who cruised to victory in the Argentine presidential election last week, has courted intense controversy with radical, provocative policy proposals and statements.

This led many detractors of the self-styled "anarcho-capitalist" to call his candidacy a "leap into the void".

Now, with the mop-haired president-elect only two weeks away from taking over Latin America's third-largest economy, many are asking, how will his policies and positions face the test of reality?

Taming inflation takes time

Javier Milei had proposed to dollarise the economy and eliminate the Argentine Central Bank as a strategy to "kill" hyper-inflation. This meant making the US dollar the national currency in place of the Argentine peso, whose value, Mr Milei said, had been "melting like blocks of ice in the Sahara".

One obstacle is that ditching the Central Bank and making the US dollar legal tender would need approval from the Argentina's Congress and could even require changing the constitution.

Although Mr Milei convincingly won the presidency, his Libertad Avanza (Freedom Advances) movement is barely the third largest political force in Congress. This suggests difficult negotiations might be in store.

Some economists have also questioned whether Mr Milei's plans are feasible, saying they would weaken his government's ability to manage domestic monetary policy.

Having the US dollar as the Argentine currency would effectively leave interest rate policy in the hands of the US Federal Reserve. Argentina's economy would be more vulnerable to external shocks involving the US dollar, for example sudden rises in prices for oil and fuel imports, which could make internal adjustments even more painful inside the country.

Sceptics also point out that Argentina would need to have in hand the US dollars to replace the pesos. Experts believe this could require anywhere between US $35bn to $50bn which indebted Argentina currently does not have and may not be able to borrow easily.

Mr Milei himself has admitted his "shock adjustment" economic stabilisation recipe could actually take up to two years to bring down inflation. "Saying anything else is lying," he said.

A climate sceptic?

Another topic that had made media headlines was Mr Milei's apparent declaration of himself as a climate change "sceptic", that is, someone who denies the role of humans in global warming.

"I do not deny climate change. What I am saying is that there is a temperature cycle in the history of the Earth... Therefore, all those policies that blame humans for climate change are false," Mr Milei said during a presidential debate last month, causing much commentary and criticism.

In his proposed government programme, one of the numerous ministries he had said he planned to axe would be the existing environment ministry.

Such apparent climate scepticism risked putting Mr Milei sharply out of tune with an international majority of governments and leaders who plan to gather at the COP28 climate conference in Dubai soon to seek urgent solutions to the problems of climate change and global warming.

Pragmatism and the Pope

Before he was elected, Mr Milei virulently attacked Argentine Pope Francis, calling him a "Jesuit who promotes communism", and even the "representative of the evil one [the Devil] on Earth".

Such statements caused frictions with the local Catholic Church and the Vatican.

However, this antagonism appeared to miraculously dissipate only days after his election win, when Mr Milei had what he called a "very friendly" phone call with the Pope, whom he addressed as "Your Holiness", inviting him to visit Argentina in 2024.

Asked in a TV interview about this change of heart, Mr Milei conceded that, when one is president, "there are some things that require greater doses of pragmatism".

No break with China and Brazil

Before his election, Milei had signalled he could freeze ties with Brazil and China, Argentina's two top trading partners, on the grounds that he did "not make pacts with communists".

"I am going to be aligned with the United States, Israel, and the free world," he said.

Not surprisingly, this assertion caused consternation in Beijing and Brasilia, as well as in Argentina.

A Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson was quoted as warning that it would be a "huge foreign policy mistake" for Argentina to cut ties with countries such as China and Brazil.

Mr Milei's predecessor, outgoing left-wing President Alberto Fernández, had carefully nurtured ties with Beijing and had welcomed an invitation to join Brics, the China-led group which also comprises Brazil, Russia, India, and South Africa.

Experts questioned the wisdom of dismantling a relationship that clearly brought benefits to Argentina, and not only by China being a top market for Argentina's soybean, meat and grains.

China was also helping to prop up Argentina's financial reserves with a major currency swap deal - significant support for a country already heavily indebted to the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

Days after the election, however, there seemed to be clear signs that no major break in relations was planned. The president-elect received a personal letter of "congratulations and good wishes" from Chinese President Xi Jinping and Mr Milei himself made a point of thanking Xi on social media.

Mr Milei's pick for foreign minister, Diana Mondino, also dismissed as "nonsense" any suggestion that there would be a rupture in "commercial relations" with China or Brazil.

In Brazil, Mr Milei's invitation for former President Jair Bolsonaro to attend his 10 December inauguration was interpreted as "unfriendly" towards Brazil's current left-wing President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva.

But Milei has since said Lula would be "well-received", if he wanted to come.

Dictatorship denial

Mr Milei and his vice-presidential running-mate Victoria Villarruel also ignited intense controversy during the campaign with their position regarding Argentina's 1976-83 military dictatorship.

Defying traditional positions held by Argentina's government and society for the last 40 years, Mr Milei caused outrage by contesting the generally accepted estimate of those abducted and "disappeared" in the dictatorship - 30,000 - asserting the actual number was closer to 9,000.

The candidate argued that the political violence of the 1970s in Argentina was a two-sided "war" in which "the forces of the state committed excesses but the terrorists [anti-government guerrillas] ... [also] committed crimes against humanity".

This equivalence of presentation of the two sides raised howls of protest from groups like the Plaza de Mayo mothers and grandmothers of disappeared persons.

This was just another striking way in which the Milei-Villarruel duo were trying to shake up the political status quo in Argentina. The next four years will show if they can do it.

closing the central bank
dollarizing the Argentinian currency

closing the central bank
dollarizing the Argentinian currency

Authorities under Milei devalued the peso sharply and have pursued moves toward a unified exchange rate while also cutting interest rates as part of stabilisation efforts.

What economic issue did Milei want to address?

What economic issue did Milei want to address?

He issued decrees that repealed or amended hundreds of laws to reduce union power and deregulate the economy, though courts have blocked some measures.

How will Milei's reforms impact workers?

Milei has advanced plans to privatize state-owned enterprises and weaken labour protections.

Title:

Content: Streets of Argentina Ablaze with Dissent as Milei’s Controversial Reforms Ignite Outrage

In a stunning turn of events, Argentina has become a battleground for public discontent following President Javier Milei’s introduction of a series of controversial proposals. Thousands of Argentinians have taken to the streets, enraged by the president’s push for drastic cuts to public spending.

Milei’s latest measures, unveiled on Wednesday evening, aim to revolutionize Argentina’s struggling economy through a variety of initiatives. These include deregulating the government and opening up state-run industries for privatization in order to spur both exports and investment.

However, the people’s outrage has manifested in widespread protests, often met with a heavy police presence. Gathering in front of the Argentine Congress, hundreds of demonstrators made their opposition to Milei’s proposals known.

Undeterred by the dissent, Milei appeared on national television to defend his agenda and offer reassurances of a prosperous future. He asserted, “Our objective is to rebuild our nation, restore individual freedom and autonomy, and dismantle the myriad of regulations that have impeded our economic growth for far too long.”

Acknowledging the mounting protests, Milei’s security minister, Patricia Bullrich, announced new measures aimed at maintaining public order. These measures grant federal forces the power to disperse protesters blocking streets without requiring a judicial order, and authorize the police to use video or digital evidence to identify and hold accountable those obstructing public thoroughfares. Moreover, the legislation empowers the state to apportion the costs of mobilizing security forces to the protesters themselves.

Milei’s presidential victory was built upon a campaign centered around reducing public spending. Since assuming office, he has already made significant changes to the country’s financial landscape. The value of the Argentinian currency has been adjusted, contracts of public employees with less than one year of service have been terminated, and the prices of basic services and public transportation have seen notable increases.

FAQ:

Q: What are President Milei’s proposals?

A: President Milei’s proposals include deregulating the government and allowing the privatization of state-run industries to boost exports and investment.

Q: Why are Argentinians protesting?

A: Thousands of Argentinians are protesting against Milei’s proposals due to their belief that the drastic cuts to public spending will adversely impact their lives.

Q: How is the government responding to the protests?

A: In response to the protests, the government has announced new measures to maintain public order, empowering federal forces to disperse protesters without a judicial order and enabling the identification of those obstructing public thoroughfares through video or digital means.

Q: What changes has Milei already implemented?

A: Since taking office, Milei has adjusted the value of the Argentinian currency, terminated contracts of public employees with less than one year of service, and increased the prices of basic services and public transportation.

(Sources: Information gathered from local news outlets)

How will Milei's reforms impact workers?

How will Milei's reforms impact workers?

He proposed a bill that would allow the executive delegation of lawmaking authority for economic emergencies and would penalize financing the deficit by issuing money.

What issue did Milei want to address without printing money?

A comprehensive reform bill granting wide executive powers was voted down by lawmakers.

His early shock measures buoyed markets but also provoked nationwide protests and strong opposition from trade unions.

How will Milei's reforms impact workers?

Who has opposed Milei's proposed layoff order?

How will Milei's reforms impact workers?

Who has opposed Milei's proposed layoff order?

Large street protests have been met with new public-order measures that permit federal forces to disperse protesters without a judicial order and to use video or digital evidence to identify participants, and that can assign security costs to protesters.

Milei faces significant legislative constraints because his La Libertad Avanza movement is a small force in Congress and he lacks governors and a congressional majority.

Title:

Content: Javier Milei against democracy

Argentines must be patient since Javier Milei can only rely on them, not on all those supposed representatives of the people.

The Argentine president suffered a setback again after the Senate rejected the mega-decree to deregulate the country. However, for the package aimed at removing the suffocating state bureaucracy to be effectively rejected, it would also have to be rejected by the Chamber of Deputies.

As expected, the libertarian targeted the senators who voted against the decree, who were not only Peronists of various currents but also some radicals.

"Let the political class decide which side of history they want to be on," said the president. He added that it is an attempt to undermine the so-called May Pact, an agreement that Javier Milei seeks to reach with the governors of the provinces and the mayor of the city of Buenos Aires so that economic freedom reigns in Argentina instead of socialism, which has destroyed the country's economy and isolated it from the world.

Milei knew that rectifying the economy would not be a walk in the park since, although he is president, his party does not have a governor, a mayor, or a majority in any chamber. This is all amid a tough but necessary adjustment to settle the country's accounts and allow it to grow again. Therefore, if it had not been for the support of the citizens, it would surely have fallen by now.

The president, a complete outsider, must have a "political waist" to reach consensus. That is, he must enter the thick, contaminated and cumbersome mud of Argentine democracy in order to implement his plan.

But who makes up this democracy that they ask so much to respect? With whom do they ask you to reach a consensus? Well, with the same ones who have trampled on the constitution, the forms, the division of powers, etc. Those who went for everything without respecting absolutely anything today whiningly ask to be taken into account when making decisions. However, if any of the measures are effectively unconstitutional, it is not something that a legislator should decide since that is what the Supreme Court is for, right?

Javier Milei has to fight against all who make up this democracy, go through the impassable swamp that the Argentine bureaucracy represents, and that many need him to continue, even if that means hyperinflation, misery, unemployment, crime, etc. We could say that the ideal slogan for socialism would be "the worse, the better." In this way, they have the perfect excuse to intervene in the economy and in the lives of everyone in order to maintain the power and business of politics. That is, they want a country of militants, not workers. A country of officials who "love" the poor but not enough to lift them out of poverty. A country where resentment is more important than self-improvement,  where restrictions are more important than freedom and crime is justified and success demonized.

In the government, there is now an honest man who makes mistakes, whose ways are, at times, questionable, but who sincerely wants to fix the country. Who is a great economist and was able to predict with impressive success all the disasters that were coming to Argentina in previous administrations. Who has enough courage to confront the interventionist dinosaurs who seek to repeat failure, using democracy or the constitution as an excuse when it suits them, despite the fact that the majority of the supposed representatives of the people are the same ones who stand in the way of the president carrying out the changes that the majority of Argentines voted for. What democracy are they talking about?

Javier Milei, with his mistakes and successes, is on the side of the free world at a global level. He is cleansing the State of wasteful militants, reducing spending and stopping emissions. He is trying to repeal laws that have been resounding failures while being mercilessly attacked by the press, by opposition politicians who are actually coup plotters, by artists and leftist militants who only seek to continue parasitizing.

Argentines must understand that if the economic improvement takes longer than desired, it is because the dinosaurs that make up this democracy are muddying the playing field, so progress cannot be made, and they have to go back.

Argentines must be patient since Milei can only rely on them, not on all those supposed representatives of the people. The solution may take a while, but don't let it fail. This government is the last hope for Argentina. Do not miss such an opportunity, which may occur only once in history.

Analysts warn that full dollarization would cede monetary policy to the US Federal Reserve, increase vulnerability to external shocks, and likely require tens of billions of US dollars in reserves.

Milei has said his shock stabilisation could take up to two years to reduce inflation.

What economic issue did Milei want to address?

He has been compared in international media to figures such as Donald Trump and Jair Bolsonaro because of his style and radical proposals.

He has expressed controversial positions on Argentina’s 1976–83 dictatorship, contesting widely accepted casualty figures and framing the period as a two-sided conflict.

Milei has signalled scepticism about climate policies and proposed cutting or eliminating the environment ministry.

He has engaged provincial governors with a proposed 10-point social contract that includes renegotiating tax distribution between federal and provincial authorities.

Taken together, Milei’s agenda aims to shrink the state, deregulate markets, privatize services, and change monetary institutions, and these shifts have raised warnings about short-term social pain, increased exposure to external shocks, and institutional clashes with courts and Congress.

How will Milei's reforms impact workers?

What does Milei promote in terms of healthcare and education?

How will Milei's reforms impact workers?

What does Milei promote in terms of healthcare and education?

How will Milei's reforms impact workers?

What does Milei promote in terms of healthcare and education?

His political approach relies on executive decrees, shock therapy-style reforms, and confronting institutional opponents when legislative support is limited.

Milei’s measures have already produced visible economic adjustments, public-sector job cuts, and higher prices for services, which have contributed to social unrest and heated political debate.

How will Milei's reforms impact workers?

How will Milei's reforms impact workers?

In short, Milei is implementing a rapid, market-oriented dismantling of state roles while facing institutional limits, public protest, and economic uncertainty.

suspended 366 decrees to ease economic controls and reduce spending.

suspended 366 decrees to ease economic controls and reduce spending.

Overall, Milei’s policies are reshaping Argentina toward a smaller state and freer markets, but they carry substantial political and social risks in the near term.

suspended 366 decrees to ease economic controls and reduce spending.

suspended 366 decrees to ease economic controls and reduce spending.

Milei’s agenda reduces the role of the state, accelerates privatization and deregulation, pushes for monetary overhaul, and has triggered protests and institutional pushback.

What does Milei promote in terms of healthcare and education?

What does Milei promote in terms of healthcare and education?

In summary, Milei is pursuing radical libertarian economic and institutional reforms that shrink state functions and seek monetary change, but implementation faces legal, legislative, and social obstacles and may bring short-term economic pain.


Jane Goodall continues to motivate young people to act on conservation through programs and media.

Her Roots & Shoots youth program was founded in 1991 and aims to empower children to choose and carry out projects that help animals, people and the environment.

Roots & Shoots is reported in the context documents as operating in about 65–70 countries depending on the source.

Apple TV+ series 'Jane' premiered April 14 and has 10 episodes that each focus on a different endangered species and include video chats with real-life animal experts.

Goodall founded the Jane Goodall Institute in 1977 to foster research, advocacy and community-led conservation.

Research at the Jane Goodall Institute Gombe Stream Research Center in Tanzania continues and constitutes the world’s longest-running chimpanzee study.

Goodall emphasizes hope and practical action, telling youth to 'roll up their sleeves' and to take small daily ethical actions that add up.

She advocates persuading others through storytelling and non-confrontational civil discourse rather than blame.

Goodall has used global platforms, including UN events and COP15-related engagements, to call for protecting ecosystems and urgent action on biodiversity and climate.

She has received honors and awards such as being a United Nations Messenger of Peace, a DBE, and a Tang Prize laureate who directed prize funds to Roots & Shoots.

Conclusion: Jane Goodall today continues to influence global conservation by empowering youth through Roots & Shoots, using media and public appearances to promote hopeful, non-confrontational action.

Jane Goodall continues to motivate young people to act on conservation through programs and media.

Title:

Content: ×

The work of legendary ethnobiologist, conservationist and activist Jane Goodall has already inspired people to care for endangered species and the environment for decades — but the doctor’s latest endeavor continues her work in motivating the next generation.

Apple TV+’s mission-driven children’s series “Jane” harnesses the power of TV, with Emmy-winning creator J.J. Johnson (“Endlings,” “Ghostwriter”) using Goodall’s teachings to motivate kids to take a stand for endangered species and care for the environment. “Jane,” from the Jane Goodall Institute and Johnson’s company Sinking Ship Entertainment, premiered on April 14, with 10 episodes now available on Apple TV+.

“Jane” features eager 9-year-old environmentalist Jane Garcia (Ava Louise Murchison) — who is inspired to help save the planet, following in the footsteps of her role model, Goodall — along with her friends David (Mason Blomberg) and a chimpanzee named Greybeard. Each episode focuses on a different endangered species, such as Apis mellifera (Western honey bee) and Panthera tigris (tiger). Blending live action and CGI — and featuring an epic theme song “One Step Closer” written by Diane Warren, and sung by Leona Lewis — the show depicts the friends taking a stand for the species and the environment, and getting into occasional trouble along the way. The episodes all end with the friends video-chatting with real-life animal experts, particularly highlighting women and people of color.

While Goodall’s years of dedication to great apes research and advocacy have made her a household name in the 21st century, she began her work at age 26 in 1960 studying chimpanzees. She founded the Jane Goodall Institute in 1977, which fosters research, advocacy as well as community-led conservation, and it empowers children — particularly through its youth program Roots and Shoots, which was founded in 1991.

A United Nations Messenger of Peace and a Dame Commander of the British Empire (DBE), Goodall’s research on chimpanzees in Gombe, Tanzania helped change scientists’ understanding of humans’ relationship to animals. The research continues in Tanzania through the Jane Goodall Institute Gombe Stream Research Center, and it is the world’s longest-running chimpanzee study.

Also a prolific author, Goodall has adult and children’s literary works such as “The Book of Hope,” “In the Shadow of Man” and “Rickie and Henri: A True Story.”

Goodall is no stranger to the screen, however, as the subject of dozens of films including “Chimps, So Like Us,” “Miss Goodall and the Wild Chimpanzees” and “Jane Goodall: The Hope” — as well as Brett Morgen’s 2017 Emmy-nominated documentary, also called “Jane.” While Goodall did not create this “Jane” for Apple TV+, her life’s work and teachings inspire the show’s protagonist who idolizes her, and if Goodall had not approved the show’s concept when it was in development, it would not have moved forward.

Goodall, who turned 89 earlier this month, spoke with Variety over Zoom about how she hopes “Jane” inspires the youngest generation, and what she hopes to accomplish next in her career.

How do you hope viewers, especially children, react when they see “Jane”?

I hope that it will encourage them to actually think more about endangered species — to think about the fact that if we’re not careful, many of these species will disappear. I hope it also will encourage young people to join our Roots and Shoots program, which is in 68 countries. It’s about young people choosing projects to help — animals, people and the environment — deciding what they want to do, working out what they can do, rolling up their sleeves and taking action.

So if this Jane Garcia encourages real-life activities, it’ll be great. I hope it will encourage young people to join in the effort to make this a better world, to choose projects that will help to save the environment before it’s too late.

Talk about environmental issues often creates anxiety in children and young adults, but it is still obviously important to learn about — how do you, through this show or beyond, hope to inspire the next generation without causing anxiety?

That’s my entire program Roots and Shoots, it’s all about taking action. If young people get together and work on projects, which is the same sort of thing with Sinking Ship Entertainment, then it’s all about positive change. We need to know that many species are close to extinction, but that we have to stop that from happening. And therefore we have to work together to find out ways of saving the animals that are moving toward extinction. We need to know about the doom and gloom — I talk about it all the time. But at the same time, it’s desperately important to give people hope, especially young people, because, yes, we can make a difference.

So “Jane” shows young people how they can get together and solve the “doom and gloom” effectively?

Yeah, hopefully. The goal is to try and get young people involved and taking action, and stepping on beyond that to do more. It’s young people getting really worried, but then working together with older people who are also wanting to try to save the species. So it’s a complete mixture.

How do we inspire the next generation to create change, without placing blame on children for a situation they didn’t create?

There are major problems and, yes, all sorts of things have led to unfortunate decreases in numbers of endangered species. But the whole emphasis is on working together to create change. Let’s get young people involved, talk about what can be done to make a difference and then, as I say, roll up their sleeves and work out what they can do. And taking action is going to be different with different species. And, basically, I hope that this program will have enough fun in it, as well as understanding the problem, that young people will be pushing toward saving a lot of these animals. Many animals on the very brink of extinction have been given another chance.

What’s an example of a species that was pushed toward extinction, but human intervention reversed the course?

My favorite one is that little black robin that was reduced to just two individuals, one male and one female. That was it. And through some very clever work, there are now about 500 of them. They’re all genetically identical, of course, but they’re being spread into four different islands. So, hopefully, there will be some genetic change so they’re not all identical, since that’s not very healthy. There are many, many stories like that.

What message do you have for people who feel hopeless, or that they alone cannot make a difference?

People have to realize that every single one of us can make a difference. We could just say, “Oh well, I know that animals are becoming extinct. There’s nothing I can do about it.” That’s really going to be the end of us. But if you decide, “I will try and make a difference, I will do something every single day,” then we can make a difference. We can choose what we can do: Some of us can help animals, some of us can help planting trees, some of us can help whatever it is that we care about. And if we all choose projects to make the world better, then it’s going to make a major difference. We don’t all give up and say, “Well, it’s just me, there’s nothing I can do.” If we give up, then the future is not very good, is it? We all have to do our bit to try and persuade other people. We’re in the middle of a pretty bad, dark space. So for young people to join in and feel, “Gosh, if I do this, I will be making the world a better place,” that’s really important.

You’ve done so much in your life and in your career — what else do you look forward to accomplishing?

I want our Roots and Shoots program to be in every school in every country. But I always say, “If you try and aim for the stars, you might reach the moon. If you aim for the moon, you might reach the head of Mount Everest,” for example. So that’s the same for the stars — and at least we can reach the moon and help to protect the various animals and plants that are facing tremendous danger. The young and old alike in different countries need to really, really work hard to save these creatures. We’ve got to do it now.

This interview has been edited and condensed.

Title:

Content: World-famous for her research with chimpanzees, Jane Goodall now focuses on the human condition

Apr 21, 2024 | 0 comments

By Michelle Cohan

In 1960, on the banks of Lake Tanganyika, Tanzania, one young British woman would set out to change what we know about primates forever.

Jane Goodall, in 1960, searching an African forest for chimpanzees.

Jane Goodall defied conventional scientific methods by immersing herself in the jungle, which led to groundbreaking discoveries about chimpanzees; most notably that they use tools, are omnivores and that they are socially complex beings.

More than six decades later, her unorthodox field work – and her conservation efforts – are still celebrated around the world.

Today, the recently-turned 90-year-old’s work looks a little different – taking place mostly indoors, and with a different crowd. Through her program called “Roots & Shoots,” Goodall empowers young people to create change within their communities. And for her, this work is just as significant.

CNN spoke with Goodall recently during a trip to South Africa, where she observed some of the projects local Johannesburg students are heading up as part of Roots & Shoots.

The interview has been edited for length and clarity.

CNN: The younger generation has so much they can learn from elders. Who made an impact on your life?

Goodall: I think it’s really important, this exchange of information from the elders to the youngers. I was really lucky; I had an amazing mother. I was born loving animals, and she supported that love of animals. I was one-and-a-half years old, and she came into my room and she found I’d taken a whole handful of wriggling earthworms into my bed. Most mothers would’ve [said], ‘Oh, throw these dirty things [away].’ She just said, ‘Jane, I think they might die without the Earth, you better take them into the garden.’ And so she nurtured this inherent love I had … in all the insects, the birds, the animals, everybody around me.

Jane Goodall

CNN: Roots & Shoots is active in 70 countries, where hundreds of thousands of young people are making an impact within their communities. How did the program come about?

Goodall: When I began Roots & Shoots in Tanzania in 1991, it was because I was meeting young people then who had lost hope. Young people who felt we’d compromised their future. And the reason they’re losing hope, it’s obvious: climate change, loss of biodiversity. I could go on listing, listing, listing … but when they said there was nothing they could do about it, then I thought, ‘No, that’s not true.’

We worked out that Roots & Shoots’ main message [would be that] every individual has a role to play. And that we needed to think holistically in terms of helping the environment, people and animals, because we are all interrelated. That’s where it began.

CNN: What is the most important message to convey to the younger generation?

Goodall: The goal that I have is helping young people understand that there is a window of time [to save the planet]. Unfortunately, today I [still] meet more and more people who are losing hope. So many people feel helpless and hopeless because [they question] what can they can do as an individual.

But what people have to understand is when it’s 2 million, 1 billion, 2 billion, 3 billion, all taking small actions to make the world a better place, that is changing the world. What matters is people understanding that as an individual, what they do makes a difference. Not because it’s just them, but because they are not alone.

CNN: Does climate innovation and technology give you hope?

Goodall: Yeah, I think that if we look around at what’s happening to the planet, we need to grab onto every single thing we can that will help us to move forward out of the disaster that we have created. And if we look at solar energy, if we look at wind energy and the power of tide energy, then these things are good.

The problem has been to get government support. So governments tend to put money into the fossil fuel industry, rather than to support the new emerging technologies that will enable us to live in a more harmonious way with the natural world. If we don’t do that, our future is doomed. And unfortunately, it’s not only our future, but so many of the other animals that so many of us love. We have to take action now.

CNN: What message do you have for the world?

Goodall: A message to the world would be, don’t forget that you as an individual make an impact on the environment every single day. And it’s up to you to choose what sort of impact you make. I think once everybody understands the role that they play, whoever they are, is so desperately important, then we move towards a better world.

Editor’s note: At one of Goodall’s recent presentations in California, 93-year-old movie actor and director Clint Eastwood was in the audience. Asked why he was there, Eastwood said he supported Goodall’s work and added that he was a big fan of 90-year-olds.
_________________

Credit: CNN

CuencaHighLife

Dani News

Google ad

Google ad

Thai Lotus News

Fund Grace News

The Cuenca Dispatch

Week of April 14

Trial of Carlos Pólit: First Week of Revelations Sheds Light on Corruption in Correista Regime.

Read more

Insecurity affects tourism in Manabí as nine cruise ships canceled their arrival in Manta.

Read more

Ecuador Gains Ground with Palm Heart, Secures 75% of the Global Market.

Read more

Country living News

Gran Colombia Suites News

Quinta Maria News

What difference does Dr. Goodall believe every individual is capable of?

What does Dr. Goodall hope the Jane Goodall Barbie doll will encourage?

What would letting children get close to nature help cultivate?

What difference does Dr. Goodall believe every individual is capable of?

What does Dr. Goodall hope the Jane Goodall Barbie doll will encourage?

What would letting children get close to nature help cultivate?

Her Roots & Shoots youth program was founded in 1991 and aims to empower children to choose and carry out projects that help animals, people and the environment.

What would letting children get close to nature help cultivate?

What would letting children get close to nature help cultivate?

Roots & Shoots is reported in the context documents as operating in about 65–70 countries depending on the source.

Title:

Content: The 4th Tang Prize Ceremony Ended Successfully
Tang Laureate ’ s outstanding achievements and impact are witnessed by a global audience
TAIPEI, Nov. 20, 2020 / PRESS RELEASE – Xinwengao.com / — “The Fourth Tang Prize Award Ceremony ” was held online at 2: 00 p.m. today, November 20, 2020. Eight Tang Prize winners from seven countries, including the United States, the United Kingdom, Japan, Singapore, Bangladesh, Colombia and Lebanon, received congratulations and applause from the global audience. Share this honor and joy to witness the outstanding achievements and world influence of the eight Tang Prize winners who are regarded as pioneers of the times.
The 4th Tang Prize Ceremony Ended Successfully
Chen Zhenchuan, CEO of the Tang Prize Education Foundation, said that the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 has affected the planned activities of the Tang Prize. However, Dr. Yin Yanliang, founder of the Tang Prize Education Foundation, has been looking forward to inviting the fourth winners to Taiwan to receive awards and participate in a series of activities. The winners of the fourth edition of the Tang Prize have made outstanding achievements and contributions to the world. At the same time, I would like to thank the Convenor of the Jury Committee, the members of the Jury Committee, and all the experts and scholars who participated in the selection process.
Dr Jane Goodall, Tang Prize Laureate for Sustainable Development
Jane Goodall, who received the award from the British Home Connection, said in her speech that today ’ s achievements are due to the efforts and companionship of friends, especially the International Jane Goodall Education and Conservation Association.
At present, the world is facing many difficult problems, such as climate change, the loss of biodiversity, the new coronavirus epidemic, etc., and local associations are also working to solve global issues.
In particular, Dr. Jane Goodall affirmed the achievements and achievements of the Taiwan Jane Goodall Association, and said that the prize money won will be used for the Association's programs, especially the "Roots and Shoots" program, which is implemented in 65 countries and nurtures young people.
Dr. Charles Dinarello, winner of the Tang Prize in Biotechnology and Medicine.
Charles Dinarello received the award from his workplace, University of Colorado, USA. In his acceptance speech, he said that he was honored to witness the development of IL-1 and the effectiveness of disease treatment, and took the opportunity to pay tribute and thank other scholars in the field, whether they are blocking cell hormones or developing innovative therapies.
He encouraged young scholars to maintain positive beliefs, uphold research ethics and maintain a cautious attitude, and continue to work hard to achieve results, and scientific research has no limits.
Dr. Mark Feldman, winner of the Tang Prize for Biotechnology and Medicine.
Marc Feldmann, who received the award from an outdoor garden link in his home in the UK, said that when he learned of the award last year, it was at a time when the COVID-19 epidemic was ravaging the world and claiming many precious lives.
He also said that receiving the Tang Prize allows him to look back on his life once again, and thanks to the support of many teams, colleagues and family members, he has the opportunity to change the world and bring benefits to millions of patients.
Tsunami Kishimoto, winner of the Tang Prize in Biotechnology and Medicine
Tadamitsu Kishimoto received the award from the Immunology Pioneer Research Center of Osaka University, Japan, for his lifelong commitment to IL-6 research, the use of tocilizumab in more than 100 countries, and the treatment of more than 1 million patients with rheumatoid arthritis, the impact of which was recognized and recognized by the Tang Prize.
Professor Wang Gung-wu, winner of the Tang Prize in Sinology
Wang Gungwu, who received the award from the University of Singapore, said that there is still much to explore in Sinology. He hoped that through the Tang Prize, more people will pay attention to the value of Chinese civilization and improve the situation of mankind.
Ms. Shaida Rezwana Hassan, representative of the Bangladesh Association of Environmental Lawyers, three non-governmental organizations, representatives of the Tang Prize for Rule of Law Award.
Syeda Rizwana Hasan, Achieving Justice: Recipient of the Center for Law, Justice and Society, Professor Vivian Newman Ponte.
Vivian Newman Pont, the recipient of the Legal Practice Process Award, Ms. Jida Farangiya,
Ghida Frangieh, from personal home or organization office connection, all three of them jointly mentioned that the recognition of the Tang Prize is more encouraging to non-governmental organizations, and will continue to strive to defend the principle of the rule of law for social and environmental justice, vulnerable groups, judicial independence and other issues.
The fourth award ceremony of the Tang Prize was held online for the first time, successfully concluded with the blessing of the global audience, and it is hoped that when the world resumes order in 2022, the award ceremony can maintain the tradition of the Tang Prize since 2014, and be held in Taipei as scheduled.
The Tang Prize Educational Foundation invites you to review the winners' demeanor and touching moments at the awards ceremony YouTube subtitles: https: / / youtu.be / lN0ADXBNT-Q; YouTube subtitles: https: / / youtu.be / 56GwDm3EL0g
The 4th Tang Prize Presentation Ceremony Successfully Ended [Xinwengao.com]
Source: Press Releases Network Partners – Xinwengao.com

Apple TV+ series 'Jane' premiered April 14 and has 10 episodes that each focus on a different endangered species and include video chats with real-life animal experts.

What does Dr. Goodall hope the the Apple TV series "Jane" will do for people?

Goodall founded the Jane Goodall Institute in 1977 to foster research, advocacy and community-led conservation.

Research at the Jane Goodall Institute Gombe Stream Research Center in Tanzania continues and constitutes the world’s longest-running chimpanzee study.

Goodall emphasizes hope and practical action, telling youth to 'roll up their sleeves' and to take small daily ethical actions that add up.

Title:

Content: Jane Goodall wants University of Wisconsin-Madison students to walk away with one message Sunday: Do not give up hope.

It’s a strategy the world-renowned ethologist and conservationist has found effective in spurring action, even as headlines catastrophizing climate change inundate people with a sense of doom.

“I don't agree with scientists who say the tipping point has already reached the point of no return with climate change and loss of biodiversity,” Goodall told the Cap Times. “We still have a window of time. But if we lose hope, fall into apathy and don't take action, then we're doomed.”

Goodall is best known for her groundbreaking work in the early ‘60s as a primatologist. At 26, she began studying chimpanzees in Tanzania, becoming the first to observe that the animals make and use tools. Now part of the world’s longest-running study of wild chimpanzees, her findings have forever changed scientific understanding of primates and humans’ relationship to them.

Goodall’s legacy also endures through her activism. In 1977, she founded the Jane Goodall Institute, a global conservation nonprofit. One of the organization’s programs, Roots & Shoots, educates young people in over 60 countries to work on environmental, conservation and humanitarian issues.

In 2021, Goodall additionally published “The Book of Hope: A Survival Guide for Trying Times,” which details her hope in the world’s ability to make change despite its environmental challenges.

Goodall will speak Sunday at 7 p.m. in UW-Madison’s Memorial Union for the Wisconsin Union’s Distinguished Lecture Series. Tickets for the event sold out among students within 90 minutes, but the public can still register to watch the online livestream.

In a virtual interview with the Cap Times, Goodall spoke from the Edgewater Hotel about climate deniers, how she remains optimistic and what the audience can expect from her on Sunday.

Will you have time to explore Madison this weekend, or will you mostly be working?

It’s all working. Not mostly — all. But the hotel has a lovely view overlooking the lake with all the ice. My life turns out to be work, meeting lovely people and just having an occasional moment to walk in a bit of nature.

What can people expect to learn from you on Sunday?

I hope they take away the message that every single one of them makes a difference every single day of their lives, and they can choose what sort of difference they make. I think that’s the most important message that anybody can have — that they, as an individual, matter and have a role to play.

Your platform revolves around this message of hope. What might be the harm in catastrophizing?

It makes people lose hope. If you’re told that nothing you can do will avert the planet heating up to a point where life is no longer possible and that we’re destroying the ecosystems on which we depend, then why bother doing anything?

The important thing is to realize we still have time, but we have to take action. We have to each do our bit. It may seem small, but billions of small, ethical actions make change.

Much of your work focuses on involving young people within conservation efforts. What inspires you about the attitudes of younger generations toward animals and the environment?

They are much more aware, which isn’t surprising. When I was young, "environmentalism" wasn’t even a word.

Young people are surrounded by doom and gloom. The radio’s full of it, the internet's full of it, the television's full of it, the press is full of it, and so they're much more aware. Fortunately, there are enough people saying it's not too late, and that inspires them and galvanizes them into action.

Do you think those attitudes are much different from older generations?

They are different because older generations either didn't understand what was happening because of ignorance, or they don't want to understand because they want to carry on with business as usual. They want to go on making money in the short term at the expense of future generations.

Sometimes I don’t think they’re thinking like that. I don't think they're deliberately understanding that they're harming the future for their children and grandchildren. But they're simply not thinking in the way that we should be thinking today.

Is it still worth trying to change their minds?

Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes! How to change the minds of the older people? Through storytelling, not through pointing fingers, not through making people angry, not by telling them they're bad, but by reaching into the heart. I’ll give you one example.

This CEO of a huge international corporation told me he was working to get his company ethical for three reasons. One, because we're using our nature's finite natural resources faster than nature can replenish them. Second, consumer pressure — people are beginning to demand ethically produced products.

But what really tipped the balance, he said, was his little girl of 8. She came back from school one day and said, “Daddy, they're telling me that what you're doing is hurting the planet. That's not true, is it, Daddy? Because it's my planet.” That reached his heart. That's the way you change people.

When did you realize this approach of storytelling could persuade people?

I think it was probably part of my nature. I'm not confrontational. I'm fighting for change, yes, but not by confronting. People must change from within. I don't believe you can change them by hammering them with facts that they don't want to listen to.

When I first went to the medical research labs where the scientists kept chimps in 5-foot by 5-foot cages, it was one of the worst experiences of my life. I came out shaken, trying not to cry. I was taken into a room with the top people from the National Institute of Health in the department of animal experimentation. I realized they were waiting for me to speak.

I said, “I imagine all of you are caring and compassionate people, and maybe feel just as I did about what's going on in there.” When you think of it, that was very clever. They couldn’t admit they weren’t caring and compassionate, could they?

Instead of telling them they were bad people, I showed them pictures of the chimpanzees in the wild, making their nests, playing, lying around. In their minds, they could contrast it with the cages where these very social beings were kept for 30 to 40 years. I know it did get into some of their hearts because they told me so. It made some labs completely change the way that they operated.

When you meet somebody, or a group of people, you may not realize that you've made a difference — but you may have planted seeds that will grow and cause change in some of the hearts.

What mistakes did you make early on in your career that emerging activists and young people can learn from?

I was saved from making mistakes in the early days. Before I went to Africa to study chimps, I was working at London Zoo. The chimps were in terrible conditions. So when I got back from my first stint in Africa, the zoo arranged a press conference. I thought now I could really tell the world how bad the chimps were treated!

I happened to be having dinner that night with a very powerful man that I met in Tanzania, and I told him about my plan with great excitement. There was dead silence. He said, “Do you realize that the head of the London Zoo is Solly Zuckerman, Winston Churchill's wartime adviser? A very, very powerful man. Do you think he's going to take it lying down when you criticize his zoo?”

He said, “Just tell me three things that are the most important to change.” I told him, and within two weeks, they were all done. There was no confrontation. That was a lesson that came just in time for me not to make that mistake.

So it’s about activists getting rid of their own personal egos.

Exactly. What people want is to have their name out there and to say, “I did it. I changed this.” It’s learning to not want to be recognized for change. The main thing is to make the change. Not “me” making the change.

This powerful man obviously didn't want me to say that the chimps were being treated badly. He immediately agreed, but didn’t want it out in the press. Give Solly Zuckerman the credit. That’s fine — as long as it changes.

This is a lesson I talk about with our youth. I tell them not to be confrontational. Your goal: Is it to glorify yourself? To be the champion? Or do you really want change?

What do people still not understand about your work and its relevance today?

Climate change deniers, people who don’t want to make a difference, probably don’t understand. What they really think is hard to tell. But are there really people who deny that climate change is happening? Probably not. When they admit it’s real, they say it’s natural and that it’s not manmade. Do they really believe that? I can’t believe they do — but that’s what they say. They don’t want to lose face, and making people lose face isn’t a good way to make change.

What makes you think they don’t really believe what they’re saying?

Well, I can't think of anybody with any ounce of intelligence could believe it. That's why.

How often do you come across those kinds of people?

Not very often. They tend to avoid me.

Kayla Huynh joined the Cap Times in 2021 and covers higher education. She graduated from Northwestern University with a master's degree in journalism after attending UW-Madison.

Support Kayla's work and local journalism by becoming a Cap Times member.

To comment on this story, submit a letter to the editor.

At the Proctor & Gamble 2022 summit on regional sustainability, what did Dr. Jane Goodall emphasize?

What difference does Dr. Goodall believe every individual is capable of?

What does Dr. Goodall hope the Jane Goodall Barbie doll will encourage?

At the Proctor & Gamble 2022 summit on regional sustainability, what did Dr. Jane Goodall emphasize?

What difference does Dr. Goodall believe every individual is capable of?

What does Dr. Goodall hope the Jane Goodall Barbie doll will encourage?

She advocates persuading others through storytelling and non-confrontational civil discourse rather than blame.

What was Dr. Goodall's approach when she spoke to the scientists at NIH regarding their holding chimps in small cages?

She treated them as caring and compassionate

Goodall has used global platforms, including UN events and COP15-related engagements, to call for protecting ecosystems and urgent action on biodiversity and climate.

Title:

Content: Leading conservationist Dr Jane Goodall warns next generation faces a 'bleak future' without action

COP15, the once-in-decade global biodiversity summit, began in Montreal on Wednesday. Ahead of the conference, ITV News spoke to one of the world's most famous and inspiring conservationists, Dr Jane Goodall.

With an estimated one million plant and animal species facing extinction, the scale of the issues being grappled with by nations at COP15 in Montreal could hardly be greater.

Entire ecosystems face collapse if we do not act, so how best to overcome this challenge?

Dr Jane Goodall has spent a lifetime trying to understand, protect and educate others about the natural world. She’s witnessed devastating habitat loss but also examples of where, given time, nature returns.

She paints a dark picture of what happens if politicians fail to rise to the occasion, saying the “price of failure is condemning our children, our children's children, to a very, very bleak and grim future.”

Talking to ITV News in Parliament, where she was marking a significant moment in the campaign to ban trophy hunting, she explains how we need to view nature.

“I would say how important it is to realise that we are actually not separate from the natural world. We are part of it and more than that we depend on it. We depend on it for food, water, everything," she said.

"We depend on healthy ecosystems. An ecosystem is made up of an interrelated mix of animal and plant species living in that ecosystem. And as more and more animals and plants become extinct in that area, so the ecosystem eventually will collapse.”

Decades of witnessing animals, such as primates, up close has forged her understanding of our world. It was notable in a room full of animal welfare campaigners just how quiet it was when she spoke.

In Montreal, the world faces a choice but it’s complicated. Delivering change includes finding a way of maintaining wealth. Making people poorer while saving plants and animals won’t work, but Dr Jane Goodall sees options that will.

She concluded: “We need nature for our own physical and psychological well-being. That's proven again and again. We must not let these ecosystems collapse, we have this window of time, we have the tools, we know how we can do things. But will we?”

Want a quick and expert briefing on the biggest news stories? Listen to our latest podcasts to find out What You Need To Know

Title:

Content:

Counting on youth, for an ‘equitable and sustainable world for all’

17 September 2021

At a virtual event on Friday commemorating the International Day of Peace, the UN chief saluted the “voices, vision and commitment of young people in shaping a more peaceful world”.

You are leaders, changemakers and advocates in our societies”, he told assembled youth online, “speaking out against violence, discrimination and inequalities” and calling for an end to conflicts worldwide, while also “leading the charge for urgent action on climate”.

Secretary-General António Guterres was attending the virtual 2021 Youth Observance, on the theme of Recovering Better for a Sustainable and Equitable World.

The UN’s asks

Mr. Guterres asked young people to support the UN’s call for a global 24-hour ceasefire, “and for all parties to conflict to commit to a lasting, sustainable peace”.

He also urged youth to “keep pushing governments and other leaders to close the vaccine gap between rich and poor countries”.

And finally, to keep sounding the alarm on the climate emergency engulfing our planet.

“As we seek peace among and within nations, we need to seek peace with our planet, too”, he said. “Extreme weather, melting glaciers, rising sea levels, and polluted air and water threaten our very existence”.

In closing he asked for young people to help the world “recover better and stronger”.

“Thank you for celebrating peace with us today, and every day. I count on your continued support as we work together to build a more equitable and sustainable world for all”, concluded the UN chief.

Voices of youth

After delivering his message, Mr. Guterres spoke online to youngsters from the United Arab Emirates (UAE), United States and Central African Republic (CAR).

Dyuthi Vasupal, from the UAE, noted the negative repercussions that COVID has had for education, especially for girls, and asked how school systems can bridge the many challenges still being faced, and help young people with “the means, access and opportunities”, to create an equitable society.

Mr. Guterres answered that because education is “the most important equalizer” in the world, it must be a priority for all governments and international organizations and that schools must be able to “adapt, to be able to change and be successful in a world that is in constant progress”.

Messengers of Peace

UN Messengers of Peace took the floor, including celebrated Japanese American violinist Midori, and students from the Chamber Music Institute performed a stirring rendition of Vivaldi’s “Spring” from the Four Seasons.

Award-winning Brazilian author Paulo Coelho emphasized that “respect is the most important thing that we have”. In an upbeat assessment, he acknowledged that while the world “cannot change overnight…little by little” it will get back on track.

British conservationist and ground-anthropologist, Jane Goodall, said that in a world full of conflict and suffering, young people are her “greatest hope”.

“They understand that nature is suffering, that we must find ways to protect forests and other ecosystems…to ban wildlife trafficking…reduce the unsustainable lifestyles of the wealthy and alleviate”, she said.

Ms. Goodall maintained that when millions of people make even small ethical choices in how they live every day, this cumulatively moves us towards a better world.

“We are all part of one human family…We need to get together and take action now, before it’s too late”, she added.

Crisis point for humanity

In a broader message marking the International Day of Peace, Mr. Guterres warned that humankind faces “a stark choice between peace and perpetual peril”, saying “we must choose peace”.

He painted a grim picture of COVID-19 turning the world “upside-down” and conflicts “spinning out of control” amidst a worsening climate emergency and deepening inequality and poverty.

The UN chief upheld however, that the world can tackle these issues “by working in solidarity for a lasting, sustainable peace every day”.

We need peace to level the playing field and reduce inequalities…to renew trust in one another — and faith in facts and science – and we need to make peace with nature to heal our planet, build a green economy, and achieve our net-zero targets”, he spelled out.

The Secretary-General said that “peace is not a naïve dream” but “a light in the darkness”, guiding us to “the only pathway to a better future for humanity”.

Let’s walk the pathway of peace as if our lives depended on it. Because they do”, he added.

♦ Receive daily updates directly in your inbox - Subscribe here to a topic.
♦ Download the UN News app for your iOS or Android devices.

She has received honors and awards such as being a United Nations Messenger of Peace, a DBE, and a Tang Prize laureate who directed prize funds to Roots & Shoots.

In addition to founding the Jane Goodall Institute, what other role has Dr. Goodall earned?

In addition to founding the Jane Goodall Institute, what other role has Dr. Goodall earned?

Conclusion: Jane Goodall today continues to influence global conservation by empowering youth through Roots & Shoots, using media and public appearances to promote hopeful, non-confrontational action.