Introduction
Argentina’s political landscape has long been a subject of intense scrutiny, marked by cycles of economic instability, institutional crises, and shifting governance models. The election of Javier Milei in 2023 as Argentina’s president introduced a radical shift in the country’s political dynamics, raising critical questions about the nature of its democracy.
Milei’s leadership style, characterized by strong anti-establishment rhetoric and a preference for centralized decision-making, has led analysts to question whether Argentina is transitioning toward a delegative democracy—a system where elected leaders govern with minimal constraints from institutions, parties, or checks and balances.
This article examines how Argentina’s democracy has evolved under Milei, analyzing key political developments, institutional challenges, and the broader implications for governance and international relations.
Understanding the Landscape: Delegative Democracy in Argentina
What Is Delegative Democracy?
Coined by political scientist Guillermo O’Donnell, delegative democracy refers to a system where voters elect a leader who then governs with little accountability to legislatures, courts, or civil society. Unlike representative democracies, where power is distributed across institutions, delegative democracies concentrate authority in the executive, often leading to personalistic rule and weakened democratic safeguards.
Historical Precedents in Argentina
Argentina has experienced delegative tendencies before, particularly under leaders like Carlos Menem (1989–1999) and Cristina Fernández de Kirchner (2007–2015). These presidencies saw strong executive dominance, weakened judicial independence, and frequent use of emergency decrees.
Milei’s rise, however, represents a more extreme version of this trend, given his outsider status, libertarian ideology, and confrontational approach toward traditional political actors.
Case Studies: Milei’s Delegative Governance in Action
1. Bypassing Congress Through Executive Decrees
One of the most striking features of Milei’s presidency has been his reliance on Decree of Necessity and Urgency (DNU) to implement sweeping economic reforms without legislative approval. Examples include:
Deregulation of key industries (eliminating price controls, labor reforms).
Mass privatization of state-owned enterprises.
Abolishing multiple government agencies by executive order.
While some argue these measures are necessary to break bureaucratic inertia, critics warn they undermine democratic deliberation and concentrate excessive power in the presidency.
2. Weakening Institutional Checks and Balances
Milei’s administration has frequently clashed with:
The Judiciary: Accusing judges of obstructing reforms, leading to threats of impeachment against dissenting magistrates.
The Media: Labeling critical journalists as “propagandists” and reducing public advertising funds to opposition-aligned outlets.
Provincial Governments: Cutting federal revenue-sharing funds to provinces resisting his policies.
These actions reflect a pattern of centralizing authority while marginalizing dissent, a hallmark of delegative democracy.
3. Polarization and Erosion of Political Dialogue
Milei’s rhetoric—often comparing opponents to “communists” or “thieves”—has deepened political polarization. His refusal to negotiate with mainstream parties (including his own coalition) has led to legislative gridlock, forcing him to govern primarily through decrees and public appeals rather than consensus-building.
Theoretical Analysis: Is Argentina’s Democracy at Risk?
O’Donnell’s Framework Applied to Milei
O’Donnell’s theory suggests delegative democracies emerge in contexts of economic crisis and weak party systems, both of which apply to Argentina. Milei’s rise was fueled by voter frustration with traditional parties, allowing him to position himself as the sole agent of change.
However, O’Donnell also warned that delegative democracies are unstable—they may achieve short-term results but often collapse due to institutional erosion or public backlash.
Comparison with Other Populist Leaders
Milei’s approach shares similarities with other populist leaders who centralize power:
Donald Trump (USA): Undermining institutions through executive orders and attacking the judiciary.
Jair Bolsonaro (Brazil): Weakening democratic norms by attacking the press and electoral systems.
Viktor Orbán (Hungary): Systematically dismantling checks and balances under the guise of reform.
Yet, Milei’s libertarian economic agenda distinguishes him, as most populists favor state intervention.
The Role of International Organizations and Foreign Reactions
IMF and Economic Reforms
Argentina’s relationship with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) has been crucial. Milei’s austerity measures align with IMF demands, but his unilateral policy style risks destabilizing negotiations if creditors perceive his reforms as unsustainable.
Regional Diplomacy: Tensions with Brazil and Mercosur
Milei’s confrontational stance toward Brazil’s Lula da Silva and threats to leave Mercosur have strained regional alliances. A shift toward bilateral deals with the U.S. and Israel signals a departure from Latin American integration.
Human Rights Concerns
International watchdogs have raised alarms over:
Crackdowns on protests (use of anti-terrorism laws against demonstrators).
Attacks on press freedom (lawsuits against journalists).
Erosion of labor rights (rolling back worker protections).
If these trends continue, Argentina could face diplomatic isolation or sanctions.
Strategies to Counter Delegative Drift
1. Strengthening Institutional Safeguards
Judicial independence: Protecting courts from political interference.
Legislative oversight: Ensuring Congress can challenge executive decrees.
Media freedom: Defending investigative journalism against government pressure.
2. Civil Society Mobilization
Protests and strikes have already forced Milei to backtrack on some policies (e.g., pension reforms). Sustained public pressure is crucial.
Coalition-building among opposition parties to present a unified alternative.
3. International Pressure
Conditional aid: IMF and foreign investors should tie support to democratic guarantees.
Diplomatic engagement: Regional bodies like CELAC and OAS must monitor Argentina’s democratic health.
Conclusion and Summary
Javier Milei’s presidency has accelerated Argentina’s shift toward a delegative democracy, where executive power dominates at the expense of institutional checks. While his radical economic reforms respond to deep crises, his top-down governance style risks democratic backsliding.
