The Neoliberal Populism of Milei and Meloni: How Far-Right Leaders Betray Their Voters
Why Read This
What Makes This Article Worth Your Time
Summary
What This Article Is About
Philosophers Santiago Zabala and Claudio Gallo argue that Argentina’s Javier Milei and Italy’s Giorgia Meloni, despite apparent ideological differences—he’s a self-proclaimed libertarian anarcho-capitalist, she leads a statist nationalist party with fascist roots—share a fundamental commitment to neoliberal populism serving Western imperialism. While both leaders capitalize on anti-establishment anger and position themselves as defenders of ordinary people against globalist elites, their actual policies systematically betray their voters’ interests. Milei won Argentina’s presidency promising to reset the system with his “out with all of them” slogan, yet immediately slashed state subsidies, fired tens of thousands of officials, and pursued privatization benefiting elites while the International Monetary Fund praised his approach.
Meloni similarly campaigned on protectionist, eurosceptic populism but swiftly aligned with Ursula von der Leyen, abandoned opposition to bank bailouts, announced massive privatization of national enterprises, and adopted pro-U.S. positions on Russia and Israel despite previously advocating better Russian relations. The authors contend both leaders wage war against the “ghost of communism” while their populations suffer from capitalism’s excesses—rising costs, crumbling services, unemployment. Their mutual admiration stems not from shared ideology but from practicing identical hypocritical populism: maintaining anti-establishment rhetoric while implementing neoliberal policies, remaining “sovereignists without sovereignty” who keep their populations subservient to U.S.-led global order while pretending to fight for them.
Key Points
Main Takeaways
Superficial Ideological Differences
Despite Milei’s libertarian anarcho-capitalism versus Meloni’s statist nationalism, both leaders fundamentally serve identical neoliberal interests rather than their populist bases’ economic concerns.
Systematic Policy Betrayal
Milei’s cuts to fuel subsidies, public universities, worker rights, and pensions directly harm ordinary Argentinians who elected him while earning IMF praise for “stabilization.”
Meloni’s Strategic About-Faces
Italy’s prime minister reversed campaign positions on bank taxation, Monte dei Paschi recapitalization, Russia relations, and European integration once in power.
Privatization Contradictions
Meloni plans selling railways and postal services despite her party’s statist history, while Milei’s privatization agenda enriches elites as everyday Argentinians experience deepening misery.
Foreign Policy Alignment
Both leaders enthusiastically support U.S. foreign policy positions on Ukraine, Israel-Gaza, Russia, and China despite domestic opposition and their supposed anti-establishment credentials.
Sovereignists Without Sovereignty
The authors conclude both leaders are hypocrites maintaining anti-establishment rhetoric while implementing policies keeping their populations subservient to U.S.-led neoliberal order.
Master Reading Comprehension
Practice with 365 curated articles and 2,400+ questions across 9 RC types.
Article Analysis
Breaking Down the Elements
Main Idea
Populism as Neoliberal Mask
The article’s central argument is that contemporary far-right populism, exemplified by Milei and Meloni, functions as ideological cover for neoliberal policies serving Western imperial interests rather than authentic representation of working-class grievances. Despite surface differences—libertarian versus statist, immigration-focused versus indifferent—both leaders systematically betray campaign promises by implementing privatization, austerity, and pro-U.S. foreign policies while maintaining anti-establishment rhetoric. This “neoliberal populism” exploits genuine anger at economic precarity to legitimate elite agendas, making these leaders “sovereignists without sovereignty” who subordinate national interests to global capital while pretending to champion ordinary citizens against globalist forces.
Purpose
Ideological Critique and Exposure
To expose the fundamental hypocrisy of far-right populism by demonstrating through concrete policy examples how self-proclaimed anti-establishment leaders actually serve neoliberal orthodoxy. The authors aim to denaturalize populist rhetoric by showing its disconnect from material outcomes—voters suffering increased misery while elites benefit, anti-globalist campaigns yielding pro-U.S. foreign policy alignment, protectionist promises producing privatization drives. This critique serves both analytical and political purposes: helping readers recognize deceptive patterns in contemporary politics while implicitly arguing for authentic alternatives addressing capitalism’s failures rather than scapegoating phantom communist threats while intensifying neoliberal exploitation.
Structure
Comparative Case Study → Policy Documentation → Systemic Analysis
Opens by establishing superficial bond between Milei and Meloni through mutual admiration and shared social conservatism, then pivots to exposing fundamental contradiction: apparent ideological differences mask identical neoliberal practice. Dedicates substantial sections to documenting each leader’s policy betrayals—Milei’s subsidy cuts and privatization harming voters, Meloni’s reversals on bank taxation, European integration, and Russian relations. Concludes by synthesizing these examples into broader argument about populism serving Western imperialism, with both leaders waging phantom wars against communism while populations suffer capitalism’s excesses. The structure moves from surface appearance to underlying reality to systemic explanation.
Tone
Polemical, Indignant & Critically Unmasking
The authors adopt sharply critical tone animated by moral outrage at political deception. Terms like “hypocritical,” “shallowness,” and “sovereignists without sovereignty” convey contempt for leaders betraying voters. The tone is polemical rather than neutral—openly advocating left critique of neoliberalism while dismissing populist authenticity. Phrases like “ghost of communism” and “excesses of capitalism” signal ideological positioning. Despite partisan edge, the argument maintains analytical rigor through concrete policy documentation rather than mere rhetorical assertion. The overall effect combines intellectual critique with political urgency, seeking to demystify populism for audiences potentially susceptible to its appeals.
Key Terms
Vocabulary from the Article
Click each card to reveal the definition
Build your vocabulary systematically
Each article in our course includes 8-12 vocabulary words with contextual usage.
Tough Words
Challenging Vocabulary
Tap each card to flip and see the definition
Advocate of eliminating the state entirely in favor of individual sovereignty, private property, and free markets, viewing all government as unnecessary coercion.
“The Italian prime minister leads a statist, nationalist party with historic links to fascism while Argentina’s president self-identifies as a libertarian and an ‘anarcho-capitalist’.”
Hasty and superficial; performed with minimal attention to detail or thoroughness, often suggesting inadequate examination of important matters.
“Indeed, a cursory review of the social reforms the two leaders enacted during their time in power immediately exposes the neoliberal spirit of their so called ‘populism’.”
Falling or dropping straight down at high speed; decreasing rapidly in value, amount, or quality, often dramatically and uncontrollably.
“In practice, however, his policies have produced nothing but more misery for everyday Argentinians while further lining the pockets of the elite, paying no regard to his plummeting approval ratings.”
A complete reversal of opinion, attitude, or direction; a 180-degree change in position, often suggesting opportunistic or hypocritical behavior.
“And this was not Meloni’s first about-face in dealing with Italy’s banks. Before the 2022 elections that brought her to power, Meloni and her party campaigned against the recapitalization.”
Favoring economic policies shielding domestic industries from foreign competition through tariffs, quotas, or subsidies, prioritizing national economic interests over free trade.
“Unlike Milei, Meloni was elected on an exclusively protectionist ticket, and her core voters are inherently suspicious of free market politics and privatisation drives.”
A mixture or medley of different elements; an eclectic collection of diverse or incongruous items, often used to suggest incoherence or randomness.
“He appears to be living in a black and white world, where the moral and free West stands strong against a dangerous potpourri of murderous communists, Marxists and socialists.”
Reading Comprehension
Test Your Understanding
5 questions covering different RC question types
1According to the article, the primary bond between Milei and Meloni is their shared ideological commitment to libertarian economic principles.
2What evidence does the article provide to support its claim that Milei’s populism is hypocritical?
3Select the sentence that best illustrates Meloni’s pattern of reversing campaign positions once in power.
4Evaluate whether each statement about the leaders’ policies is true or false according to the article.
Meloni maintained her campaign opposition to bank taxation after becoming prime minister and refused to compromise with banking lobbies.
Both leaders support U.S. foreign policy positions on Ukraine and Israel-Gaza despite their supposed anti-establishment credentials.
Milei considers himself a “fanatic of Israel” and appears prejudiced or hostile against China according to the article.
Select True or False for all three statements, then click “Check Answers”
5What can be reasonably inferred about the authors’ view of authentic populism versus the version practiced by Milei and Meloni?
FAQ
Frequently Asked Questions
Neoliberal populism describes a political strategy combining anti-establishment rhetoric appealing to working-class grievances with actual policies serving global capital and Western imperial interests. Leaders like Milei and Meloni campaign against corrupt elites and globalist forces while implementing privatization, austerity, deregulation, and pro-U.S. foreign policies that benefit financial institutions and transnational corporations at voters’ expense. This contradiction allows them to maintain populist legitimacy through symbolic opposition to “the establishment” while functionally serving neoliberal orthodoxy. The term captures how contemporary far-right movements exploit authentic economic anger to advance elite agendas under cover of nationalist or sovereignist language.
Despite Milei identifying as libertarian anarcho-capitalist and Meloni leading a statist nationalist party with fascist roots, their policy implementations converge on identical neoliberal outcomes. Milei openly pursues radical privatization and state dismantling consistent with libertarian ideology, earning IMF praise. Meloni must be less transparent given her protectionist base, but ultimately pursues similar privatization—selling railways and postal services—while abandoning statist campaign promises. The article argues their apparent ideological gulf is superficial because both subordinate their nominal philosophies to serving Western imperial interests through identical economic policies: privatization benefiting elites, alignment with U.S. foreign policy, and betrayal of working-class supporters who elected them.
This phrase captures the fundamental hypocrisy of leaders who campaign on nationalist sovereignty rhetoric while subordinating their nations’ interests to U.S.-led global order. Both leaders rhetorically oppose globalist forces and promise to restore national autonomy—Milei against international leftism, Meloni against European Union constraints. Yet both immediately align with Washington on Ukraine, Israel-Gaza, Russia, and China despite domestic opposition. They claim to represent popular sovereignty against distant elites while implementing policies dictated by IMF, European Central Bank, and U.S. strategic interests. The authors argue this makes their sovereignty claims performative rather than substantive—they possess nationalist rhetoric without actual independence from hegemonic power structures they ostensibly oppose.
Readlite provides curated articles with comprehensive analysis including summaries, key points, vocabulary building, and practice questions across 9 different RC question types. Our Ultimate Reading Course offers 365 articles with 2,400+ questions to systematically improve your reading comprehension skills.
This article is rated Advanced because it requires sophisticated political-economic literacy including understanding neoliberalism, populism, imperialism, and their complex interactions. The authors assume familiarity with contemporary European and Latin American politics, financial institutions like the IMF and ECB, and theoretical debates about sovereignty and globalization. The argument operates on multiple analytical levels simultaneously—comparing two leaders’ policies, exposing contradictions between rhetoric and practice, and synthesizing these examples into broader systemic critique. Vocabulary includes specialized terms like “anarcho-capitalist,” “eurosceptic,” and “recapitalization.” The polemical tone requires distinguishing authors’ evaluative claims from factual reporting, while the underlying critique presumes left theoretical frameworks that readers must recognize to fully comprehend the analysis.
The authors document several dimensions of imperial service. First, both leaders implement neoliberal policies favored by international financial institutions despite harming their populations—Milei earns IMF praise, Meloni backs down to ECB pressure. Second, both enthusiastically support U.S. strategic positions on Ukraine, Israel-Gaza, Russia, and China despite these stances contradicting campaign promises or domestic preferences. Third, Meloni specifically reversed her opposition to Russian relations after taking power, immediately “bowing to Washington.” Fourth, both leaders focus on combating “phantom” communist threats rather than addressing material problems caused by capitalism’s excesses. The authors argue this pattern reveals fundamental subordination to U.S.-led order despite anti-establishment rhetoric designed to suggest independence.
The Ultimate Reading Course covers 9 RC question types: Multiple Choice, True/False, Multi-Statement T/F, Text Highlight, Fill in the Blanks, Matching, Sequencing, Error Spotting, and Short Answer. This comprehensive coverage prepares you for any reading comprehension format you might encounter.
