Very Different: the Differences Between Lacalle Pou's and Milei's Management and Ideas

This moment in Lacalle Pou's government clearly shows the "Uruguay that is, was, and will be like this" and highlights once again the country of immobility that Batllismo so praises.

Unlike figures like Sanguinetti or Lacalle Pou, Javier Milei represents a total break with that status quo.

While Uruguayan politicians, even the most reformist ones, usually operate within a stable and pragmatic social-democratic system, Milei proposes a radical change, with ideas like drastically reducing the State, eliminating public companies, and promoting extreme liberalism.

In Uruguay, no one has dared to challenge traditional structures with such audacity; local parties, although they discuss nuances, avoid disruptive proposals for fear of destabilizing the political consensus.

Milei, on the other hand, has the guts that the Uruguayan system never had: he launches without fear to question everything, from economic foundations to international relations, regardless of criticism or consequences.

That's what makes him unique and distinguishes him from Uruguayan leaders, who prefer to keep the ship sailing in familiar waters rather than risk a storm.

I would like to make a comparison with the reforms of President Javier Milei in Argentina and Luis Lacalle Pou in Uruguay, to analyze notable differences in their approach and political philosophy:

Role of the State: Milei has promoted a significant reduction of the State, advocating for privatizations and deregulation, in line with his libertarian ideology.

In contrast, Lacalle Pou defends a "strong State," not necessarily large, but with robust institutions and a clear separation of powers, arguing that this is essential for social cohesion and the enjoyment of individual freedom.

Here's an interesting point, although Lacalle Pou never defined himself as an anarcho-capitalist like Milei nor denied the role of the State as the Argentine leader does, from 2014 to 2024 Lacalle had a shift in his discourse.

In the 2014 campaign, for Lacalle Pou, the State was an obstacle to individual freedom and economic development.

His speeches, although they didn't reach a statist extreme, shifted toward the need for a strong State to guarantee those individual freedoms, with phrases that will remain in history like "the State makes a fool of itself."

This shift to the extreme center, of which Lacalle Pou is proud, led to the furious criticism of Milei's libertarianism and to label the Uruguayan leader as "lukewarm," "lefty," or "leftopath" according to Federico Leicht, and to earn some Kirchnerist applause for opposing Milei in his speech, some ironic flattering comment from a Frente Amplio supporter "finally realizes" and all the maximum multicolor Uruguayan and Korean-centrist Argentine anti-Milei applause.

The benefit is rather personal; little remains of this positive in centrist positions, which end up validating in fact the more leftist positions.

-

Specific Reforms: While Milei has implemented measures through decrees of necessity and urgency (DNU) and an ambitious omnibus bill to reform the Argentine State, Lacalle Pou's reforms have been more focused on consolidating economic and social stability without so much emphasis on reducing the State, but on its efficiency and social cohesion.

In summary, Milei's reforms seek a deep and rapid transformation of the State toward a more liberal model, while Lacalle Pou focuses on a balance between economic liberalism and the need for an active State in key areas for Uruguayan society.