TIME Magazine has made Donald J Trump, re-elected to the White House, as its Person of the Year. These POTY titles don’t necessarily mean the publication thinks that X or Y are good or praiseworthy; what counts is that they are significant in some overwhelming way. Trump fits the bill perfectly. Without a doubt, his election in November will shake things up, not always for the better. But shake them up they surely will.
If I were to choose an alternative POTY from the ranks of politics, my choice would be Javier Milei, president of Argentina. He’s been in the job for just over a year. On his watch, inflation in a high-inflation country has sunk to low single-digits. He’s deregulated the rental market and prompted a flood of new rental housing, cutting rents as a result. He brandished a chainsaw as his symbol of what he wanted to do to government. Thousands of public workers have been laid off; a number of regulations have been scrapped. The price of Argentinian debt, both public and private, has risen, and the yields have fallen. This represents a massive vote of confidence in the creditworthiness of a nation renowned for its fecklessness for decades. This will attract capital and investment, helping the country pull out of recession and hopefully, boost living standards in a sustainable way. It needs to happen: there is a lot of poverty in that country.
As a result of some of this free market medicine, the Argentinian peso has risen in value: The peso-dollar has surged 22 per cent a year before. So much so, in fact, that Keynesian columnist Ambrose Evans Pritchard, who often predicts the case for reflating this or that country with lots of cheap money, has denounced this situation. For those who have seen Latin American currencies reduced to dogfood (apart from maybe in Chile) in recent decades, no higher praise for Milei can be higher than catching the glare of a columnist who is so often wrong in his predictions.
So there you are: My choice for Man of the Year would be a chainsaw-wielding fan of Austrian economics in Buenos Aires, an actual classical liberal in a world gone increasingly collectivist.
Update: I fixed the way of expressing the foreign exchange rate; apologies. The point stands: the peso is worth a lot more today than a year ago.
Another update: Does a stronger Argentina make it more likely the government might try and re-take the Falklands? Maybe; one risk factor now in play is that under a socialist and self-hating PM, Sir Keir Starmer (who has an inferiority complex about Mrs Thatcher), the Argentinian public might, with some reason, think there is a chance the UK could be persuaded to transfer control. There is a lot of oil down in the South Atlantic; Milei does not, as far as I know, give a damn about Net Zero and might eye the area as a key resource. But he is also not a fool and might, with justice, think that a row with the UK is not worth the trouble, particularly if Argentina looks to rebuild trade relationships, particularly in a world of rising tariff barriers.
Javier, easy choice.
I’d vote for Elon Musk – but I may be a little premature. A better time would be when the first manned Starship lands on Mars.
Not an easy choice for me, but i, too, would go with Javier.
Donald, Elon, Volodymyr, and Bibi (and Nayib Bukele) have deserved that title for years. But now it’s Javier’s turn!
Trump, without question.
Toss up between the Argie and St Elon for me.
I think Elon is going to be hard to beat as the man of the century myself, and he is just getting going.
Not to dispute in any way the point of all the above, but if it takes more Argentine Pesos to purchase 1 US dollar, is that not the value of the currency going down?
Since person of the year isn’t necessarily praiseworthy (after all both Hitler and Stalin have had it), I’d say Joe Biden. His utter fecklessness has lead the world into two gigantic wars, one of which he has taken the perfectly wrong line on (either don’t fund it and make it détente or do fund it and let Ukraine win. The middle road is the worst of all possible outcomes, unless you are a shareholder in a major defense contractor.) He has destroyed America’s reputation abroad, emasculated us in trade especially with China, destroyed the central European economy by blowing up their gas pipeline, flooded his country with low grade workers, criminals and terrorists, engaged in democracy destroying lawfare, made a fool out of the democrat party and on and on.
That’s a lot of destructive influence from someone who can barely go to the bathroom without some help.
However, Trump was the right choice. I am shocked at the change going on in America right now. I do wonder what he is up to with this budget thing, but we will see. Javier is a Rockstar, and no doubt his influence will spread. But on the world stage I think his influence is a bit limited in terms of its impact. Not zero, and it will be a fabulous example of good government for a hundred years, and will make the Argentinian people much better off.
(FWIW, as Argentina gets much, much stronger and Britain gets much, much weaker, were I a Falkland Islander I’d be getting nervous.)
Save Elon for next year: if he and Vivek can do 1/2 of what they propose, they will both deserve such recognition and much more…after all, do we really care what the editors and publishers of Time think?
And one year is all they’ve got: if they haven’t chainsawn the USG by then, it ain’t happening! Think about how long one year is at SpaceX!
Who in their right mind thought Milei could fix Arg without a high level of austerity? Yeah, it will be very painful for some period of time, but not as existentially dangerous as not doing what he’s doing.
Trump’s election heralds a better world in the future. Bibi, in destroying more pure evil than anyone since Churchill, has already completed a large part of that work.
I’m with Fraser Orr on biden. Who better demonstrates the depths to which the common intellect has sunk? What better example of why we all need to do a little better in future?
Probably not Number One, but I’d put the grouping of Joe Rogan and the Triggernometry guys somewhere in the top ten.
Or maybe just a big category of New Communicators.
I would say Milei, because he is getting things done and has made a significant difference, and he inherited an inflation from his predecessor which spiked when Milei took office, and he not only does the right thing, but knows why he is doing it and does not adopt the premises of the Left and says he won’t do as they do, but actively refutes them. Trump so far, deprecates or insults his opponents, Milei refutes them and shows his contempt for them at the same time.
President Milei of Argentina is indeed the person of the year – he has got government spending down, which governments often talk about doing but very rarely do (for example after “Tory Austerity Cuts” government spending was HIGHER not lower). Although, structurally, a President of Argentina is in a stronger position (in relation to the system of government) than a President of the United States.
However, the rigged (“fixed”) exchange rate is not a good thing – exchange rates can not be stable between fiat currencies, such as the Dollar and the Peso, exchange rates can only be stable if countries are using the same commodity as money (say gold or silver – there are still people in Mexico who would like to restore silver money and they are correct), if currencies are just fiat, command-edict-whim, then exchange rates must be allowed to fluctuate freely – or economic distortions build up.
As for the United States – its political system was designed for a LIMITED Federal Government which could only spend money on the things specifically listed in Article One, Section Eight of the Constitution of the United States.
“the common defense and general welfare” is the PURPOSE of the specific spending powers then granted to the Congress by Article One, Section Eight – but intellectually corrupt courts declared there was a “general welfare spending power” – which would make the rest of Article One, Section Eight meaningless, and would also make the Tenth Amendment (which limits the power of the Federal Government to the things listed in the Constitution) meaningless.
In short if the “general welfare spending” concept is accepted, which it has been, then the structure of the American government means that de facto (if not officially legal) bankruptcy is inevitable.
Fiat (command-edict-whim) money has allowed the Federal Government (and its “partners” the Corporations) to spend vastly more than they could have spent any other way (which is why the 5 to 4 Supreme Court decision of 1935, allowing the Federal government to rob, by threat of violence, everyone of their gold and allowing the Federal Government to violate all contracts, public and private, was so terrible), but in the end has just made The Collapse (TM) vastly worse than it would have without fiat money.
In short President Trump could be the Arch Angel Michael (sword and all) and he could still not, not with the structure of the American government, save the United States from de facto bankruptcy and economic collapse (for which he may be, UNJUSTLY, blamed).
The structure of the Federal Government (the great power given to Congress and so on) just was not designed for a “general welfare spending power” (rather than “the common defense and general welfare” being the PURPOSE of specific spending powers) and it certainly was not designed for fiat money.
Contrary to some people in this parish, fiat money is (not is not) inherently evil (and I use the word “evil” deliberately) – it is command-edict-whim money designed to benefit a corrupt elite at the expense of everyone else (the Cantillon Effect) – but fiat money is particularly toxic given the structure of the American Federal Government which is just not designed for it – any more than it is designed for a “general welfare spending power”.
Roger Sherman, at the Constitutional Convention, warned that the two great dangers to the future of the American Republic were fiat money (should it ever arrive) and unlimited government spending – and he was correct.
I say again – at this point it is very hard to see what President Trump, or anyone else, could do. The doom of the present system is already set.
Mr Ed:
The only word that i understood in the video at the link is ‘mierda’.
That does not sound like a cogent refutation 🙂
But then, perhaps in a ‘Latin’ country, one should expect colorful language.
(Although Italian politicians before Berlusconi had perfected the art of speaking without actually saying anything. The 2 things for which i give credit to Berlusconi are shaking up the Italian political discourse, and paving the way for Meloni.)
In any case, comparing Milei to Trump is an ‘apples to oranges’ comparison.
Trump might not have offered cogent arguments, but there have been plenty of Americans who did it for him, even before 2016.
Of course, Trump will have a much greater impact than Milei; but that will not happen until next year, and we are discussing the person of 2024.
“My choice for Man of the Year would be a chainsaw-wielding fan of Austrian economics in Buenos Aires, an actual classical liberal in a world gone increasingly collectivist”
Sure. LMAO.
The problem is that people like Milei don’t actually hate the state. His “chainsaw posing” was just that – posing.
He literally *doesn’t* hate the state, he just wants control over it. He might well be a “classical liberal” of the “I love the state when the state is just the police” bootlicker variety, but he’s not a “classic liberal” of the “I wish to restrict the state regulations over workers” variety – and both types very much existed back in the 19th Century.
He’s literally sicced the state on protestors against a regime that has dropped half his country into poverty. Absolute madness. I’m the last person to praise government action as an anarchist, but *ffs*, you don’t do it whilst simultaneously clamping down on street-level and worker-level action like he has.
Person of the year?
Sure, in the same way as fucking Stalin or Hitler were.
Owie: Trump’s election heralds a better world in the future. Bibi, in destroying more pure evil than anyone since Churchill, has already completed a large part of that work.
Good shout: Bibi is not out of the woods politically, but he’s been a tough leader in a world surrounded by snakes (Biden, much of the West).
bobbyb: Probably not Number One, but I’d put the grouping of Joe Rogan and the Triggernometry guys somewhere in the top ten.
This calls for a separate post, but I would rank these guys in the top 10 for influencers for views I support:
Konstanin Kisin (Triggernometry);
Joe Rogan (his impact on the culture is immense);
Yaron Brook (not a big influence, but he’s done a lot to make Ayn Rand’s view of the world accessible to a mass audience and also has been immense on Israel);
Chris Williamson (crunching some of the nonsense about the culture wars, BS around “toxic masculinity, etc);
The “Goodfellers”: HR McMaster, John Cochran and Sir Niall Ferguson;
Allison Pearson and Liam Halligan (the “Planet Normal” podcast on the Daily Telegraph);
My old boss, Andrew Neil, and another, Allister Heath;
Tom Clougherty, Kristien Niemietz at the Institute of Economic Affairs podcast – absolute gold;
Nick Gillespie and his Reason podcast interviews.
Thankfully, the only people on that list that are meaningful are Rogan and Pearson, and they’re largely derided by anyone under 30 with any sense.
Some of the others (Kisin, maybe Niemietz) are known, but are lumped in with Rogan and Pearson (by sensible people) as odd ones who are largely only listened to by people who a) aren’t having sex, and b) don’t really know how the world works, the fucking snowflakes.
I admit my choice is largely based on whimsy, but last year’s UK poll has played gentle on my mind ever since, especially as it made so many ‘progressive’ heads explode – J. K. Rowling.
“especially as it made so many ‘progressive’ heads explode – J. K. Rowling.”
lol, I’m going to go with the woman who spent most of 2024 accusing non-white biological women of being men.
It’s just my “whimsy” uwu
Has to be Trump. That image of Trump shouting ‘Fight! Fight! Fight!’ after the assassination attempt will be on the front of history textbooks in 100 years time. Trump’s second term could end up mediocre and he’s still made a mark on history that will likely be remembered beyond anything else this year.
This time last year so many people on left and right said he was finished. He was going to jail they said. Or Desantis would blow him out of the water in the primaries. They said he was electoral poison etc etc etc…..
The Trump “Obi-Wan” meme, “strike me down and I will rise more powerful than you can know” or words to that effect, really is true.
It’s amazing how spectacularly the Left’s attempt to destroy Trump has backfired.
Makes Obi-Wan’s resurrection seem lame!
Oh, and regarding “St Elon”, I’m 100% behind what he and Vivek are setting up to do, but due diligence requires the Senators who must approve their appointments to ask about all those government contracts, conflicts of interest, etc. Example: subsidies for EVs should be zeroed out immediately…is Elon supportive of that?
Snorri: Trump might not have offered cogent arguments, but there have been plenty of Americans who did it for him, even before 2016.
It is not too much to expect a POTUS-elect to have cogent arguments. Nothing I have seen of how DT makes a case for things like tariffs suggests much in the way of cogency. This is a drawback, particularly when such ideas – tariffs – prove to be bad, as they will. What is great about Milei is that he is, as they say, “based” – his economics is true and grounded on reality and an understanding of how things work. That’s a mighty advantage when there are setbacks, as there assuredly will be.
Neonsake: Thankfully, the only people on that list that are meaningful are Rogan and Pearson, and they’re largely derided by anyone under 30 with any sense.
Depends on “meaningful” and whether a person has long-term or short-term influence. Rogan has big power by his whole “I am an ordinary guy asking questions” schtick that has worked wonders because he is willing to let people talk. The others, such as Brook or Kisin, are spreading ideas; they aren’t, by and large, only interviewing people but setting out viewpoints and trying to get these into the culture. (Kisin gives lectures and talks, while Rogan confines that to his comedy routines.) That takes a lot of time and can be a slog.
Pearson is great. The Essex Constabulary proved itself to be particularly thick in how it treated her. As bad has been the supine conduct of Essex police commissioner Roger Hirst (who is an elected figure, and a Conservative, by the way)
Johnathan Pearce – the budget deficit in Israel is 7% of GDP – and Israel is surrounded by enemies and has many enemies INSIDE the nation – and not just Islam, many “Jews” who do not really believe in Judaism (such as the leftist judges – appointed by the bureaucracy with no democratic input at all) are loyal to the “international community” NOT Israel.
The American budget deficit is even worse than the Israeli budget deficit (in spite of America not being at war) only Brazil is even worse than the United States in its fiscal position.
This is at the peak of the “economic cycle” before the bust – and the United States already has a budget deficit which is over 7% of GDP.
The “strong economy” the lying Corporations (such as CNBC and Bloomberg) talk about – is a House of Cards.
It is going to collapse – and President Trump will, unjustly, be blamed.
A President of the United States lacks the powers to really deal with government spending – unlike a President of Argentina.
The American system of government was designed for a Congress that could only spend money on a few specific things (listed in Article One, Section Eight of the United States Constitution) specific things that were for the PURPOSE of “the common defense and general welfare”.
The American system of government was not designed for a totally corrupt situation where the courts have declared there is a “general welfare spending power”, and the money itself (the so called “Dollar”) is now nothing but fiat – i.e. the whims of the Corporate State (not gold, not silver, not anything – apart from Professor Krugman’s “men with guns” there to enrich a corrupt elite at the expense of everyone else – Cantillon Effect).
“Obamacare” alone, like Medicare and Medicaid before it, is basically a “blank cheque” – this is no real control of its budget.
But the American people must take some of the blame – in 1936 60% voted for Franklin Roosevelt (“FDR”) in spite of him stealing (with the threat of violence) all monetary gold and breaking all contracts, public and private, – their ancestors would have dragged Mr Roosevelt from the Whitehouse, tarred and feathered him, and then hung him from a tree – but in 1936 60% voted to reelect him (the influence of the public education system and the radio stations?).
And in 1964 the same thing happened – the voters responded to President Johnson declaring “War on Poverty”, i.e. declaring unlimited government spending on insane schemes (designed by people such as “Cloward and Piven” with the deliberate intention of making poverty WORSE and with the deliberate intention of undermining society) – the voters responded by reelecting Mr Johnson by 60% of the vote – because they were told “Goldwater will blow up the world!”
So it is not just the Collectivist establishment elite who have undermined the United States – the people (or most of them) have also failed, failed by not seeing thru the lies of the Collectivist establishment elite.
It is going to collapse – and President Trump will, unjustly, be blamed.
Let’s assume your prediction of doom is true. My question to those who tend to act as defenders of Mr Trump is why is this man (who attended the Wharton Business School and apparently has or had a high IQ), not able to articulate these points about debt, spending, and the weaknesses of the monetary system in the US and West? Why does he embrace terrible ideas such as tariffs? Why was he, in his first time, railing against Jerome Powell, Fed chair, for not cutting interest rates?
What is enraging to me is that he now has a bully pulpit to do what Milei has done, and talk about and achieve big retrenchments in the state, and to fire up the spirit of enterprise, and talk about people having liberty, and agency, over their lives. He can do that, not just to slay the crud coming from the Higher Education sector, but also to reawaken what it means to be American. If he is blamed for any slowdown that occurs, he can shield himself if he wants by preparing the American public for the pain that must come. But that’s not his approach, I am afraid: he did not talk about entitlement spending in the election, for example. But at some point, they must be on the table.
People forget that Mr Trump was a registered Democrat little more than a decade ago. His conduct in many ways is not that of a limited government conservative. He may have, in his first term, have surrounded himself with a few people who were, and did good things (those judges for the Supreme Court, cuts to taxes, such as corporate tax, retiring some regulations) but none of this came, as far as I could see, from a strong, coherent philosophy of freedom, opportunity and limited government. Instead, it was more a sort of “flying by the seat of my pants”, or “art of the deal” approach. It occasionally produces good things such as, hopefully, DOGE, and the guy chosen to be Energy Secretary. Sometimes he can choose reasonably good folk around him: Marco Rubio should be good at State Department, and I don’t think the Defense Sec. will be an issue. But some of his contrarian behaviour will, I think, backfire: Tulsi Gabbard in the intelligence sphere, and RFK, a Green nut and man with more character flaws than all the Kennedys put together.
So it is not just the Collectivist establishment elite who have undermined the United States – the people (or most of them) have also failed, failed by not seeing thru the lies of the Collectivist establishment elite.
Sadly that is true. Far too many people leave our education system mal-educated, with a mistaken view of the role of the State, and much of our culture is saturated with it now. It makes the sort of changes that happened under Reagan in 1980 doubly difficult now. But let’s hope that Trump and whoever follows him (Vance maybe) continues to do so.
I suspect that they hold some sway over a very small portion of the interwebs, and far less than they used to. For whatever reason, the Rogan/Petersen/Tate etc seem to have dropped out of fashion somewhat amongst the kids in the UK (which I’m – obviously enough – happy about, I’m not going to pretend otherwise)
Pearson is…well, problematic to say the least. Her views on trans rights and Covid are not something I can ever support. Again, from my perspective, I’m happy that she’s not well-known amongst the younger generation.
I genuinely respect the fact that you’ve said that, you didn’t have to. Fair play to you, Jonathan.
How do you know that Pearson isn’t well known by that age group? Have there been surveys? Genuine question.
Only in as much as talking my teams at work, who are mainly less than 30 years old.
Nowadays, they might be aware of your Rogan’s, your Petersons and your Tate’s and the like, but they see them as being pretty risible. I think there’s a break that happened post-2020.
Pearson just doesn’t even come up, and if she does, her views are…well, they’re not popular.
So they’re all for lockdowns, think biological sex is a social construct and that free speech should be controlled?
Ugh.