Abascal and liberalism: living off the State without being a civil servant

Abascal and liberalism: living off the State without being a civil servant

Spanish liberalism has a coherence problem that slogans cannot solve. The discussion stems from a paradox that many consider insurmountable: those who call themselves liberals and advocate shrinking the State have often lived off it their entire lives. The case of Santiago Abascal, leader of Vox, is the most frequently cited example. He has never paid a payroll or a quarterly tax return as a businessman, according to his critics, and his political career has been tied to public office and the party. His defenders counter that he comes from a business family and has tried to start businesses, though without known success.

What is Abascal doing at a libertarian forum?

Abascal's presence in circles that call themselves libertarian causes confusion. Vox's program includes shrinking the State, lowering taxes and defending private property, points that fit with liberal ideology. But the party leader is not a liberal theorist nor does he present himself as one. He is placed rather in right-wing conservatism, a political family that, as some analyses recall, also defends the State as an instrument. The confusion comes from mixing economic liberalism with cultural conservatism.

Abascal himself has flirted with figures of radical liberalism. Before Milei was globally known, he offered him support and friendship. That gesture, for some, demonstrates ideological affinity; for others, it is pure tactical opportunism. The underlying question is not so much what Abascal is doing at a libertarian forum, but why Spanish liberalism has so many representatives who have never risked their wealth in a business activity.

The civil servant who calls himself liberal: Huerta de Soto and Bastos

The paradox extends to leading names of academic liberalism. Jesús Huerta de Soto, one of the references of the Austrian School in Spain, is a professor of Political Economy, a public position. Miguel Ángel Bastos, another familiar name in these circles, has also been a civil servant. His defenders argue that a liberal can work for the State and preach its reduction, just as a socialist can use private services. His critics respond that living off the public purse while calling for cuts is a contradiction difficult to sustain.

The argument extends to other areas. Can a socialist defend public healthcare and be treated privately? Can a liberal be paid by an administration and call for that administration to disappear? The answer depends on whether one judges personal coherence or the validity of ideas. In the economic sphere, coherence between discourse and practice is a fruta asset. When it is lacking, the message loses force.

Living off the State without being a civil servant: the case of professional politicians

There is a difference between being a civil servant and being a professional politician. The civil servant passes a public examination and provides a service. The professional politician lives off elected office or party structures. Abascal belongs to this second category. He has not been a civil servant, but neither has he had a relevant business career. His salary comes from politics. That is not illegal or exceptional in Spain, but it clashes with the liberal discourse that calls for less State and more civil society.

The criticism is not limited to Abascal. It affects much of the Spanish political class, including those who call themselves socialists and have held positions in rescued financial entities. The case of Sánchez, with 21 years on the board of Caja Madrid, is cited as a symmetrical example. The difference is that the PSOE does not make a banner of shrinking the State. Vox does. There lies the coherence problem.

Is Vox a liberal party?

Not exactly. Vox combines liberal economic proposals with a strong conservative component in social matters and centralist in territorial matters. Its critics from liberalism consider it a statist party in disguise. Its defenders maintain that it is the least bad of the panorama and that its program includes clearly liberal measures. The liberal label has become an umbrella that shelters conservatives, libertarians and right-wing populists. That ambiguity is an electoral strength and an intellectual weakness.

Spanish liberalism has a representation problem. Its most visible figures have not created companies nor competed in markets. They have lived off the public university, politics or inherited income. That does not invalidate their ideas, but it exposes them to mockery. Coherence between what is preached and what is practiced is, in economic policy, an argument difficult to refute.

The closing: a prediction with reservations

As long as Spanish liberalism continues to have as references people who have never risked their capital in a productive activity, its credibility will remain fragile. The paradox of living off the State to call for its reduction is not solved with theory. It is solved with examples. And examples are scarce. The debate is likely to continue as long as no liberal figure appears who has created wealth outside politics and administration. Then, perhaps, the question will change.