Nayib Bukele, Javier Milei, and the Flourishing of South American Democracy
If you didn’t know better you might think Nayib Bukele, the recently re-elected President of El Salvador, was a typical Latin American despot. He won his reelection with 90% of the vote, numbers comparable with any number of totally rigged elections in totalitarian systems. What is amazing about Bukele, however, is that he won in a free and open election. It almost seems impossible that a politician in a democratic system could have such a high percentage of his country vote for him. But he did. How did he accomplish this?
There are many factors that fed into Bukele’s victory. Chief among them is the near miracle of taking El Salvador in five years from being one of the most violent and dangerous countries in the world to being one of the safest. Bukele has been so successful that Ecuador, Honduras, Columbia, Chile and other South American nations are attempting to follow El Salvador’s example.
Something similar is happening in Argentina, though it has more to do with the economy than with crime. In his first month as President Javier Milei (who won the election with around 11% of the votes) has managed to balance the government budget, something that hasn’t been done since 2012. The inflation rate has already dropped from 211% in 2023 (the final year of the previous government) to 20.6% in January 2024 (Milei’s first full month in office).
Why are these men so popular? Mainstream press would lead you to believe that both are part of a menacing rise in the popularity of far-right authoritarianism (nearly every internet search return attaches the label “far right” to each man), despite the fact that Bukele originally came out of the major leftist political party in El Salvador and Milei is a libertarian. The continuing inability of legacy press to suppress information that counters the aims of globalist elites probably accounts for the hyperbolic rhetoric about these two. These elites spend a lot of money to keep men like Bukele and Milei from winning and are understandably distressed at their inability to stop them from doing so.
The reason for the rise of such leaders appears to be very simple: El Salvador, Argentina, and many other nations in the world are tired of living in chaos and disorder. They are tired of unchecked crime and shattered economies. So tired, in fact, that they are willing simply to ignore the manipulative tactics of the elites who are trying to keep their nations in such sorry states. Entire nations are waking up to the fact that they don’t have to live with anarchy. Enough is enough.
In The Hungarian Way of Strategy by the political strategist Balázs Orbán (no relation to Viktor Orbán, the current Prime Minister of Hungary) there is a wonderful discussion of a 14th-century painting by Ambrogio Lorenzetti, which was an allegory on the differences between good and bad government. The portion of the painting depicting good government is described by Orbán like this:
The city grows, teachers instruct children in schools, and the shops and market stalls are full of goods to sell. A fair is being held in the street of the city. In the countryside, meanwhile we see the cycle of agricultural labor, as all diligently fulfill their appointed duties.
Orbán continues:
In this allegorical picture we can clearly grasp the central aim of government strategy, for while the allegory is, of course, stylized and idyllic, it nonetheless clearly illustrates the most important strategic goal toward which a country should strive: the attainment and maintenance of political stability and the guarantee of physical security for the population. These are the conditions under which the economy can flourish, cultural institutions can be built, and the citizens of the community can establish dynamic networks of relationships. It is important that, in addition to security, some form of social order develops, in which all can contribute to the community according to their particular skills and abilities. The details of the fresco suggest the key importance of nurturing strong ties between citizens living in different environments and in different social classes—this is indicated by the busy traffic between the countryside and the city.
Orbán then describes the other portion of Lorenzetti’s painting:
By contrast, the most striking effect of bad government is the spirit of fear—even terror—that hangs over both city and countryside. The weak are stabbed, the rich robbed, and gangs of soldiers or mercenaries pick through the ruined city or plunder the countryside. The only flourishing industry is the manufacture of military equipment; all other businesses are closed, and the schools are empty as citizens flee the land.
Why have Bukele and Milei been elected with such large margins? The simple answer is that they recognize that the most important thing a country can seek is “the attainment and maintenance of political stability and the guarantee of physical security for the population.”
As Bukele put it in his recent speech after reelection to the Presidency:
We have prioritized the rights of the honest people over the criminals’ rights. That is all we’ve done. And that’s what you say is a human rights violation. I ask these organizations, I ask the governments of these foreign nations, I ask these journalists, ‘Why do you want them to kill us? Why do you want to see Salvadoran blood spilled? Why aren’t you happy to see that blood doesn’t run in our country as it did before? Why? Why should we die? Why should our children die? So that you can be happy that we are respecting your false democracy, which you don’t even respect in your own country?’
When it comes to priorities for a state, order and security matter more than anything, even the specific details of the form of a nation’s government. True freedom is impossible otherwise. In a disordered and unsafe nation the only people who are free are criminals and those who profit off of disorder. In an ordered and safe nation everyone who abides by the rule of law is free. Freedom cannot exist simultaneously for both groups.
What is so striking about El Salvador, Argentina, and other South American nations is that order, safety, and freedom for all law-abiding citizens have all been accomplished through the democratic process. Democracy is not the problem in failed states; rather, it is disorder, crime, and corruption.
The Bible does not mandate any form of government, democratic, monarchist, oligarchic, or otherwise. But it does confirm the truth presently on display throughout South America, that order and safety are non-negotiable to good and just government:
Proverbs 28:12: “When the righteous triumph, there is great glory, but when the wicked rise, people hide themselves.”
Proverbs 28:28: “When the wicked rise, people hide themselves, but when they perish, the righteous increase.”
Proverbs 29:2: “When the righteous increase, the people rejoice, but when the wicked rule, the people groan.”
Unchecked wickedness and disorder will demoralize a people while it destroys their nation.
It is interesting to consider why this renaissance of democratic flourishing is occurring throughout South America, but seemingly not in America, Canada, the UK, and other similar nations. Conditions were extremely bad for a long time in these South American countries. That is certainly a major reason, but there is no necessary reason such successes could not be replicated in America. Despite the many counsels of despair (on which see here) on offer in America today (national divorce, etc.), one of the most heartening things about what is happening in South America is that all of this change has taken place democratically, even with massive efforts to paint these leaders as fascist dictators. That should be encouraging. The forces set against order, safety, and true freedom may seem invincible, but they aren’t. Similar forces in Cold War East Germany seemed invincible until a single misstatement in a press conference brought the Berlin Wall down, leading soon to the end of East Germany as a separate nation. Corrupt authoritarians often appear much stronger than they really are.
The global elites who once controlled mainstream discourse stand to lose massive amounts of money, influence, and power if dismantled, so they will no doubt fight tenaciously, but Bukele, Milei, and others have shown that these elites can be successfully resisted. The fact that the underhanded activities of these elites are increasingly coming to public light is also an encouraging sign (in, for example, the Twitter files, the work of men like Aaron Kheriaty, Jay Bhattacharya, Michael Shellenberger, Mike Benz, and others). Instead of following the counsel of despair, how about more of this?
Why, then, are men Nayib Bukele and Jaier Milei so popular right now? The primary answer is that they are agents of order. They are also agents of freedom. But the only genuine freedom, as Edmund Burke once put it, “is a liberty connected with order: that not only exists along with order and virtue but which cannot exist at all without them.” Or as Montesquieu said before Burke: “Liberty . . . presupposes a government so ordered that no citizen need fear another.” Our friends in the Southern Hemisphere are showing us how true this is.
Order alone implies nothing. In the 1920s and early 1930s, Germany suffered tremendous disorder both economic and social. Then starting in 1933, Germany became very orderly and began to financially thrive. Stalin brought order to the Soviet Union. The Sandinistas brought order to Nicaragua in the early 1980s, and they also introduced democracy. And then an outside power brought violent disorder. And now that history of disorder has affected how the Sandinistas rule today after regaining power.
The questions about bringing order are what price was paid to bring it and who has and will pay that price. We should note that the bill for bringing order sometimes comes in installments.
First, we should know the historical context in which violence emerged and flourished. During the 1970s and 1980s, El Salvador suffered severe internal conflicts between a repressive gov’t and leftist forces. Many young men were gathered up and forced into the military. As a result, many people, not just men, fled to the US, especially LA, for refuge. But a not so funny thing happened in LA. The El Salvadorans there faced violence from racist Mexicans–certainly only some were racists. El Salvadoran gangs were formed to protect the refugees from the violence of those who were racists. One of those gangs eventually became the MS-13 gang. As criminals were deported from the US in the 1990s, gang members were to and so a gang culture was also deported back to El Salvador. From there gangs emerged and grew into the problem that it has been.
We should that Bukele has garnered a tremendous amount of power over the legislature, military, and judiciary. He and his party have either disregarded the rules or worked their way around them. Journalists feel threatened and the voices of other political voices are disappearing from the government. In other words, Bukele has gained and centralized his power in El Salvador and all in a manner for which there are horrific historical precedents.
The price for order is not always immediately paid, but the bill does eventually come. And though gangs have been the first to pay the price and that should cause few, if any, to shed a tear. But who will be paying the price in the future and what will that price be?
Again, history teaches us that the immediate bringing of order implies nothing about a leader. One hopes that Bukele’s seizing of power is only temporary and that we could look at this stage of his Presidency as a jump start to a peaceful stabilization. Then his whole tenure as President can be celebrated. But if Bukele is more interested in power than bringing a peaceful order, his governing will eventually cause a violent disorder which might be camouflaged by the outer appearances of El Salvador’s society. History tells us that that has happened before. And so history teaches us that the immediate bringing of order implies nothing about a leader.
Curt Day delenda est.
Ryan,
Your science fiction reference has no meaning here. Why? The article isn’t about me. The article is about a, perhaps premature, glowing review of two leaders who seem to have brought order to where there was chaos. And the one thing that you can neither discredit nor disprove; history teaches us that the bringing of order implies nothing about value of a leader. The same applies to their current popularity.
So how do you feel about Bukele and/or Milei?
Commie Curt on 12/19/2023:
“Besides being similar to Narcissists, as I pointed out in a previous discussion, traditionalists rely too heavily on the past to interpret and respond to the present. Perhaps it is their discomfort with the present moves them to believe that those in the present have nothing to teach those in the past.”
Follow your own logic, dude. Every comment you make while hijacking this blog is a whopping nothing burger full of your own personal agenda.
Andrew,
Note the quote in which I adapted the statement about ‘everything to teach and nothing to learn from others.’
It comes from the speech that Martin Luther King Jr. gave in opposition to the Vietnam War:
–‘The Western arrogance of feeling that it has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them is not just’–
We can replace the word ‘Western’ with a fill-in-the-blank and the same statement could be made about too many groups that come from all ideological sides. And so that statement can be applied to SOME conservative ideologies, some liberal ideologies, and some leftist ideologies. What the keyword of that statement is the word ‘arrogance’–something that is never smiled on by the Scriptures.
Those who believe that their ideology has everything to teach and nothing to learn from others are implying that their ideology is either absolutely or relatively omniscient. And by claiming that their ideology is omniscient, they are claiming that they have a monopoly on the answers to our problems.
Now how different is that attitude from the attitude exhibited in the following prayer?
–‘‘God, I thank You that I am not like other people: swindlers, crooked, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week; I pay tithes of all that I get.’’–
All too often, our attitudes toward God are exhibited by what we think of others. If we believe that we are saved because God’s mercy and grace through faith in Christ alone, it will be at least partially shown in the attitudes we have toward others, including those with whom we disagree. The above prayer is greatly inconsistent with the attitude that those who believe they are saved by God’s mercy and grace should have. Unfortunately, we all fall prey to that attitude.
I understand the Christian Nationalist perspective on the job of the government. That it should be to work for the greatest common good. And since Christian Nationalists have the Bible and their traditions, they believe that they have a monopoly on defining what greatest common good is. But in so thinking, they are exhibiting attitudes that the Bible, using some of the strongest language, adamantly opposes.
Realize that the perspective that some Christian Nationalists have of the job of the government is no different than some of the dictators from the past. Take Vlad Lenin for example. Not that he held to any Christian beliefs, but he believed that the job of the government is to work for the greatest. common good. And similar to SOME Christian Nationalists, he believed that the ideology that he and Bolsheviks held to had a monopoly on defining the greatest common good. And so he accused all who even partially disagreed with him as enemies of the people.
BTW, commenting a lot is not hijacking the blog. If I had hijacked the blog, then I would have also seized control of what articles could be posted. I have neither the interest nor ability to do that.
Also, I only comment on the articles that interest me, and that seems to occur in spurts.
Andrew,
It’s been a few decades since I first read R.C. Sproul’s book on reformed theology, but I seem to recall a story he told there. Someone (was it maybe a Martian?) came to earth and visited three different churches, and he came away thinking they were all nuts. The first was a Wesleyan Methodist chapel, where everyone was yelling “Fire! Fire!” The second was a Baptist church, where everyone was shouting “Water! Water!” The third was a Presbyterian church, where everyone was calling “Order! Order!”
God designed us to live in order and made it so that order was a necessity for men and women to prosper. Our American founding forefathers brilliantly designed our government in such a way that under ordered liberty, the American people would flourish in ways previously unknown to man. So, it’s really not surprising that those who have made themselves enemies of God would encourage disorder. It’s not shocking that they would descend to the level of needing to defend gangbangers who terrorize women, or who argue for the need to guard the rights of drug-dealing extortionists who make it impossible for honest business transactions to occur. It’s not even unexpected that they would insist that locking up those who have murdered in cold blood is somehow a violation of their human rights. Those who claim to despair over what they assert are the supposed authoritarian tendencies of Bukele are themselves nothing but petty little tyrants themselves who seek to silence anyone who disagrees with them.
I myself am tremendously encouraged by what I see from Bukele. By his actions and his words, he appears to me to be a true man of godly honor. I’m almost certain I would have some disagreements with him theologically, as I assume he is Roman Catholic, but I could be wrong about that. What I am sure about is that he is a patriot who loves his country and his people, and he has transformed his own country in ways that Barack Obama could never even dream of. The amazing extent of the support of his people, evidenced by his reelection victory, shows what is still possible when an honest man exercises power justly. If only Republicans would learn that lesson. The fact that he is causing American leftists to have hysterical hissy fits is just an added benefit.
We live in the best of times and the worst of times, but our God reigns. Standing for truth and honor and goodness is always going to draw the ire of the enemies of God. But God will sustain us, and Jesus, who redeemed us with His own blood and called us out from darkness into His marvelous light, will not fail us. Don’t be discouraged, God is not mocked. For every Christianity Today falling into increasing irrelevance, there is an American Reformer. For every Russell Moore, there is a Doug Wilson. For every David French, a Michael Foster. For every apostate Beth Moore, there is a faithful-to-the-end Joel Belz, who is even now worshiping His Savior face to face.
Mark,
We were designed to live In a world that no longer exists. Adam sinned and man and nature fell. And so there will be times of tension between what we need to do from what we were originally made to do. We can’t talk about Biblical design without mentioning the fall and its effects on us and the world we live in.
Odd that the founding fathers you talked about put into The Constitution the part about due process. Due process should be necessary in controlling gangs. But suppose we excuse Bukele’s initial rush to clean the streets. Will his current authoritarian actions be always required? Will he let go of some authority in the future now, or when, the streets are clean? And with the threats that journalists and dissidents feel, who else will become targets of Bukele’s order?
Criticizing Bukele doesn’t imply a defense of law breakers. Rather, criticism of Bukele can be inspired by the same concern that our founding fathers had for governmental tyranny. That is why I wrote order alone implies nothing and then provided examples of when order led to tyranny and an example of when it led to democracy. Who Bukele is as a leader will become more apparent as time goes on. History teaches us that now is not the time to rush to judgment.
Four years is a pretty good amount of time to get a handle on the situation, so it’s hardly a rush to judgement. Or should we not have an election this year, since it’s too early to pass judgement on Biden? Why was it all right to pass judgement on Trump in 2020, after only four years?
All too often the criticism of Bukele IS in fact a defense of law breakers. I’ve heard it myself from the mouths of plenty of commentators. Please don’t try to deny that. Doing so only causes many of us to assume the worst of your arguments, which is that you are not here in good faith. Also, Bukele did not SEIZE power, as you claimed. He was legitimately elected, even after his opponents pulled all kinds of illegitimate stunts to try and prevent it. There have been all kinds of political machinations going on over the last five years in El Salvador which have been unprecedented. Guess what, the same thing can be claimed here in the US. For crying out loud, Biden just announced he’s going to forgive a bunch of student loan debt, despite the Supreme Court ruling that he doesn’t have the power to do so. But of course, that’s your side doing it, so everything’s just kosher.
Your constant lecturing everyone that they are less than your own perfect self is both grating and hypocritical. You seriously need to take a good hard look in the mirror. But of course you won’t, and of course, you’ll insist on having the last word, like you always do, because of course you’re so perfect. You might want to remember that you are just as fallen and as prone to sin as anyone else. And very much prone to being incapable of seeing your own faults and the fallacies in your own arguments. Try acting like an adult, instead of a petulant child. But of course, you’ll answer me just like you do everyone else who you have constantly argued with in the comments. Of course, you’re always right, and the rest of us are just incapable of seeing the brilliance of your intellect.
You really should try living an actual life instead of thinking that constant arguing on the internet with perfect strangers is going to give you some sense of fulfillment. Hopefully you realize that you’re going to die someday, just like the rest of us. The way you’re acting, no one will even care, other than to breathe a sigh of relief that you finally shut up.
Mark,
I simply asked questions about Bukele. I have offered no overall assessment of his Presidency except a concern for the amount of power he has. He was legitimately reelected President after his political party changed the demographics of highest court in El Salvador which changed the law banning him from getting another term. How much power he has seized depends on how much control he has over his party. I don’t know how much power he has over his party, do you? I made no such guess.
Read the last paragraph of my first comment on this article. I copied and pasted it below:
–‘Again, history teaches us that the immediate bringing of order implies nothing about a leader. One hopes that Bukele’s seizing of power is only temporary and that we could look at this stage of his Presidency as a jump start to a peaceful stabilization. Then his whole tenure as President can be celebrated. But if Bukele is more interested in power than bringing a peaceful order, his governing will eventually cause a violent disorder which might be camouflaged by the outer appearances of El Salvador’s society. History tells us that that has happened before. And so history teaches us that the immediate bringing of order implies nothing about a leader.’–
Now read part of my response to Andrew’s comment. Why? Because it seems that you assume that I am a democrat who supports Biden:
–‘Note the quote in which I adapted the statement about ‘everything to teach and nothing to learn from others.’
It comes from the speech that Martin Luther King Jr. gave in opposition to the Vietnam War:
–‘The Western arrogance of feeling that it has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them is not just’–
We can replace the word ‘Western’ with a fill-in-the-blank and the same statement could be made about too many groups that come from all ideological sides. And so that statement can be applied to SOME conservative ideologies, some liberal ideologies, and some leftist ideologies. What the keyword of that statement is the word ‘arrogance’–something that is never smiled on by the Scriptures.
Those who believe that their ideology has everything to teach and nothing to learn from others are implying that their ideology is either absolutely or relatively omniscient. And by claiming that their ideology is omniscient, they are claiming that they have a monopoly on the answers to our problems.’–
There is a similar theme in those two comments. It is a caution regarding those who claim too much for their side whether that too much is in terms of power or in terms of wisdom and knowledge. And that the temptation to claim too much for one’s side crosses all ideological boundaries so that conservatives, liberals, and leftists are all vulnerable to give into that temptation.
You feel a real anger inside toward me and it was never my intention to trigger such anger when I give my opinion on the articles that interest me. But it is unclear as to what is triggering the strength of response that is in your last comment. Because the anger seems to be an accumulation rather than a reaction to a single article. And the anger has caused you to lash out personally. So what views have I expressed, besides my views on Bukele that have made you so angry?
Yeah, right.
Projecting much? You have absolutely no self-awareness at all. Thanks for proving my point. Once more you have shown that your intellectual dishonesty is matched only by your emotional immaturity. You claim I have anger, when it is in fact you who are filled with such anger and rage that you insist upon having verbal diarrhea at a website that you disagree with, posting thousands of meaningless words strung together, regurgitating leftist arguments ad nauseum in pointless comments to numerous articles written by men who are far more intelligent and accomplished than you will ever be, then redirecting your arguments at your next shiny object whenever anyone dares to point out the flaws in your thinking. You respond to every criticism with another thousand-word screed defending your position to the hilt, when a simple “Maybe I’ll have to think about that” would have been a much wiser, calmer, more mature response. But instead, you’re so certain of yourself, and so confident of your own superiority, even though all you’re really capable of is pulling facts out of your backside. If your arguments are so brilliant, why don’t you make them on a website you build yourself? Because no one would go there, that’s why.
Your projecting onto me your own anger isn’t going to work with me. I’m not angry, I just find you repulsive. I’m pointing out your dishonesty and your childish refusal to own up to it. Have you never learned the lesson that sometimes you should just stop digging your hole deeper? Why is it that you feel so compelled to argue with people you’ve never even met? Is it really that so all-consuming important to you that you can only validate yourself in your own eyes by responding to a comment that wasn’t even addressed to you in the first place? You really should find yourself a real job, and probably try and get more sleep while you’re at it.
It is you who are guilty of being so arrogant that you are incapable of learning anything from anyone who criticizes anything you write. You just want to vomit out your propaganda and go on to the next thing and the next article to disagree with so you can practice your mental masturbation in public. You have so hardened your heart, and so seared your conscience, that it is doubtful that you will ever come to your senses and repent of your narcissism, which is the least of your sins. You insist upon calling evil good and good evil. The Bible is clear on where that leads.
Mark,
You’re the one who is making the personal accusations about me, please list the personal accusations that I have made about you besides saying that you are angry. In reality, the accusations don’t matter because the above article isn’t about neither of us, it is about Bukele. You are happy with him and I say that history tells us that the jury is still out. For history shows that some regimes that have brought immediate order to a chaotic situation have worked well while others have not. BTW, how is saying that the jury is out calling someone ‘evil’?
Whatever dude. I hope you get some help.