Latin America may gain its second “Milei” in Chile
- Ricardo Gurgel
- 16 de nov.
- 9 min de leitura
Today, November sixteen, two thousand twenty five, Chile is holding the first round of its presidential elections, which is expected to push turnout above eighty percent among the fifteen million eligible voters. Johannes Kaiser, from the National Libertarian Party, has emerged as a surprise, showing explosive growth in the final polls: from seven percent in August to fourteen to seventeen percent in November. He is not expected to win the first round, since the frontrunner is Jeannette Jara from the left with twenty six to thirty three percent, but he may reach the second round on December fourteen and attract vote transfers from the fragmented right. Preliminary results will be released later tonight.
And yes, the comparison with Javier Milei, president of Argentina since two thousand twenty three, is fascinating: both represent a libertarian anti establishment wave in Latin America, appealing to young people frustrated with crime, immigration, and what they see as an oversized state. But Kaiser is more pragmatic and adapted to the Chilean context.
A Shared Economic Vision: The Legacy of Ludwig von Mises
Both interpret economics mainly through the ideas of Ludwig von Mises, the Austrian economist who founded the Austrian School of Economics, a central figure for libertarian thought and an essential reference for anarcho capitalism, even though Mises himself supported a minimal state responsible for defense and justice rather than pure anarchy.
Unlike presidents with little understanding of economics, who pretend expertise to justify power without real knowledge of what they are doing, Milei has a deep economic foundation, focused on functional free market models and rejecting what he calls “illusionist models” such as those of Keynes. His international counterparts, skilled in politics but merely pretending to understand economics, predicted disaster for Argentina after Milei based on superficial reasoning. They ignored that strong reductions in the state, such as eliminating ninety percent of ministries, aim to correct chronic distortions rather than create immediate chaos.
Why is Keynes admired worldwide and Mises is not?
Because it is a line of thought that pleases presidents attached to state control. Thinkers like John Maynard Keynes are praised by ministers of finance who whisper to national leaders: “Look, we will follow this model that allows you to do what you want: maintain control, influence, and thousands of appointments in the government.” Many countries, still far from sustainable development (whether as cause or consequence of this unsatisfactory model), have ministers who defend state intervention to “stabilize cycles, ensure full employment, and respond to crises.” Milei and Kaiser strongly reject this approach. This interventionist vision was applied intensely in Argentina under the Kirchners, in Venezuela under Chavez, and in other populist governments, producing predictable fiscal disasters: hyperinflation, shortages, unpayable debt, and institutional breakdown.
But the problem is not limited to extreme cases. Even in more moderate forms, applied Keynesianism generates chronic deficits, market distortions, and debt cycles in practically every country where it is used, from Brazil after nineteen eighty eight (with hyperinflation and repeated failed plans) to Europe after two thousand eight (with bank bailouts that expanded public debt).
Johannes Kaiser (Chile) and Javier Milei (Argentina)
Both are libertarians who were elected to Congress in two thousand twenty one (Kaiser in Chile and Milei in Argentina), with anti establishment messages, intensive use of social media, and strong appeal among young voters frustrated with crime, immigration, and what they see as an oversized state.
Theme / Proposal
Kaiser: A moderate libertarian. Supports a strong reduction of the state but accepts the role of the armed forces, police, and basic public education. Wants to partially privatize Codelco, the state-owned copper company. Milei: A full anarcho capitalist. Wants to eliminate the central bank, adopt the dollar, remove ninety percent of ministries, and privatize everything, including waterways and public offices.
Kaiser: Complete closure of borders, mass deportation, end of humanitarian visas, and a physical barrier on the northern frontier. Milei: Strong control, but less absolute. Ends entry based on “human rights” criteria, with a focus on security, but does not propose a physical barrier.
Kaiser: Very firm approach. Supports the death penalty for drug traffickers, military presence in high risk areas, and civilian access to firearms. Milei: Expands civilian access to firearms but does not support the death penalty, which is constitutionally prohibited. Focus on privately managed prisons.
Kaiser: Conservative but pragmatic. Opposes unrestricted abortion but does not seek to repeal the 2017 law that allows it under three circumstances. Critical of what he calls “radical feminism.” Milei: Strongly pro life. Wants a national referendum to reverse the 2020 abortion law and describes abortion as “a severe moral offense.”
Kaiser: Provocative but institutional. Uses irony, memes, and YouTube. Avoids direct insults. Milei: Highly confrontational and theatrical. Chainsaw symbolism, loud catchphrases like “Viva la libertad,” and offensive language toward opponents.
Kaiser: Does not support dollarization. Advocates for a strong Chilean peso, a thirty percent cut in public spending, and elimination of subsidies. Milei: Dollarization as a fundamental principle. Burns peso banknotes during rallies.
Kaiser: Sceptical of climate policies. Supports expanding copper and lithium extraction without environmental restrictions. Milei: Completely rejects mainstream climate change narratives, calling global warming a “fabricated idea,” and aims to exit the Paris Agreement.
Kaiser: Supports Israel, is critical of Venezuela and Cuba, and maintains a cautious but pragmatic stance toward China while favoring trade. Milei: Strong ally of the United States and Israel. Severed diplomatic engagement with China, calling its government “authoritarian,” and froze relations with Brazil, referring to President Lula with offensive language.
Kaiser: Pragmatic. Negotiates with Chile Vamos (traditional right). Could support Kast in a second round. Milei: Isolated. Broke ties with most parties, governs through emergency decrees, frequently vetoes laws, and faces constant judicial disputes. |
Profiles/Thinking
Kaiser: High. Quotes Human Action to criticize socialism. Defense of a minimal state responsible for security and borders, consistent with classical minimal state theory. Milei: Very high. Calls himself an open disciple of Mises. Carries Mises books during rallies. Fully anarcho capitalist, influenced also by Rothbard.
Kaiser: Complete. Describes state intervention as “legalized confiscation.” Proposes a thirty percent cut in public spending and elimination of subsidies. Milei: Absolute. Calls Keynes “a fraud.” Eliminated the central bank and fifteen ministries to avoid Keynesian style deficits.
Kaiser: Partial privatization of Codelco, a strong Chilean peso without dollarization, and free lithium exploration without environmental restrictions. Milei: Full dollarization, privatization of everything including waterways, and symbolic use of a chainsaw to represent cuts to the state.
Kaiser: Criticizes Boric as a “light version of Kirchnerism” and warns of a “future Chilean collapse” without Mises inspired reforms. Milei: Experienced the “Kirchner era disaster” firsthand, including the two hundred eighty nine percent hyperinflation of 2023, which he uses as a global warning.
Kaiser: Pragmatic. Negotiates with traditional right wing groups and grows through YouTube and debates, reaching about fifteen percent of votes today. Milei: Governs through emergency decrees, maintains a confrontational performance style, but Argentina brought monthly inflation down to four percent in 2025. |
Average of Polls for the Presidential Elections in Chile (2025)
The elections indicate a polarized scenario, with the left leading in the first round but the fragmented right potentially uniting in the second round (scheduled for December fourteen if needed). The main candidates include:
Jeannette Jara (Communist Party, governing left coalition, ally of Gabriel Boric): Focus on social reforms, reduction of working hours, and expansion of rights.
José Antonio Kast (Republican Party): Emphasis on security, combating irregular immigration, and reducing public spending.
Johannes Kaiser (National Libertarian Party): Strong libertarian proposals, including complete closure of borders.
Evelyn Matthei (Independent Democratic Union, center right): Seeks stability and more moderate coalitions.
Average First Round Voting Intentions
Poll aggregators (such as Celag Data, AtlasIntel Bloomberg, Criteria, and Cadem) from June to November two thousand twenty five show the following averages:
Candidate | Average Voting Intentions (%) | Notes |
1. Jeannette Jara | 28 to 32 percent | Consistent frontrunner since June; projections range from 28.2 percent (early November) to 32.7 percent (October). |
2. José Antonio Kast | 21 to 24 percent | Recent recovery; averaged 23.26 percent in October. |
3. Johannes Kaiser | 12 to 16 percent | Surprising rise in recent weeks, from 8 percent to 15.6 percent. |
4. Evelyn Matthei | 13 to 16 percent | Stagnant; fell from initial lead to third or fourth place. |
5. Franco Parisi (independent, right leaning populist) | Around 10 percent | — |
6. Undecided / Blank / Null votes | Around 10 to 15 percent | — |
7. Others (Enríquez Ominami, Artés, Mayne Nicholls) | Below 5 percent each | Low relevance. |
No poll projects more than 50 percent for any candidate in the first round, making a second round inevitable.
Second Round Scenario (head to head simulations):
Kast would defeat Jara by 47 percent to 39 percent (AtlasIntel).
Kaiser or Matthei would also have an advantage over Jara, due to the fragmentation of the right in the first round, which could unite afterward.
Jara does not surpass 45 percent in second round projections, reflecting the wear on the Boric administration (approval around 30 percent) and widespread concern about crime (53 percent of voters cite public safety as their main priority).
Dominant Themes
Security and immigration: These issues concern 53 percent of voters and boost right leaning candidates.
Economy and social fatigue: After the failed constitutional processes from 2019 to 2022, there is a desire for stability, but also for greater equality.
Impact of mandatory voting: High participation is expected (above 80 percent), which may benefit outsider candidates.
The result may signal a shift to the right, similar to regional trends (for example, Milei in Argentina), but polarization suggests a close and competitive race. Preliminary results will be released later tonight.
Why Chile is likely to achieve stronger results with Kaiser than Argentina did with Milei, and with far less social and economic strain
The comparison between the Argentine and Chilean scenarios makes one point very clear: the starting position matters. Liberal economic reforms, whether in the Milei model in Argentina or in a potential Kaiser model in Chile, produce far more effective and far less painful outcomes when implemented in economies that are already relatively balanced, with solid institutions and much lower levels of macroeconomic distortion. This is precisely the situation in Chile.
1. Chile does not face the same extreme distortions that Argentina did
Before Milei’s reforms, Argentina had accumulated decades of structural imbalances:
chronic inflation above 150 percent
extensive price and tariff controls
persistent fiscal deficit
multiple exchange rates and a completely distorted foreign exchange market
strong dependence on monetary financing of the Treasury
negative international reserves
This scenario made any adjustment inevitably harsh.
Chile, on the other hand:
has controlled inflation
maintains a functional floating exchange rate
does not use widespread artificial price freezes
has moderate fiscal deficits or surpluses
preserves international credibility, investment grade status, and robust reserves
Conclusion: Chile does not need to dismantle a deeply distorted economic system. It starts from a level of normality that Argentina did not have.
2. Chile has a structurally more open and integrated economy
Chile is one of the most open economies in the world, with dozens of free trade agreements and stable rules.
Pro market reforms in open economies:
generate faster results
attract foreign investment more easily
involve lower social costs
Argentina, by contrast, was relatively isolated, with low external confidence and a history of institutional instability.
3. Chile has a much more predictable institutional and regulatory system
One of the biggest obstacles to economic reform in Argentina is legal and regulatory instability: laws change frequently, the judiciary is unpredictable, and there is strong corporate influence from unions, provincial governors, and interest groups.
Chile, despite recent political tensions:
maintains institutional stability
has a long tradition of fiscal discipline
has had an independent central bank for decades
uses clear rules for investment and trade
Reform built on predictable rules costs less and produces more.
4. Chile does not face a fiscal explosion, which allows for reform with far less pain
The key to the “Argentine suffering” lies in the massive and immediate fiscal adjustment. Milei had to cut:
huge subsidies
a large primary deficit
uncontrolled public spending
tariff distortions accumulated over decades
These cuts resulted in:
temporary recession
increased poverty
tariff shocks
reduced household income
Chile, by contrast:
has more balanced public accounts
does not sustain unsustainable subsidies
does not carry a long term structural deficit
Thus, liberal reforms in Chile do not require traumatic austerity.
5. Chile already has better prepared human capital and a stronger private sector
Argentina, after decades of interventionism and instability, eroded much of its productive business sector and encouraged the search for regulatory shortcuts.
Chile:
has more competitive companies
has a solid financial sector
has a market oriented economic culture
is more predictable for global investors
Reforms work better when economic actors are prepared to respond positively.
6. Chile enters the reform process with healthier expectations
Argentina entered Milei’s reforms with:
very low credibility
broken expectations
structural pessimism
historic capital flight
Chile, even with recent instability, still maintains:
medium term confidence
institutional credibility
a history of fiscal responsibility
Healthier expectations reduce the need for economic shocks.
Chile is likely to experience a far less painful transition
If Kaiser implements a liberal economic program similar to Milei’s, the outcomes in Chile are likely to be:
faster
less traumatic
with smaller declines in purchasing power
with higher confidence and stability
with greater investment inflow
This happens because Chile starts from a functional baseline, while Argentina began from a deep internal collapse.
Liberal reforms never have the same impact in two different economies. In the Argentine case, the house was on fire. In the Chilean case, the house is standing. This allows reforms to be implemented with far less suffering and far more robust results.
Comentários