I can remember precisely where I was the first time I
met Milton Friedman. I was standing in the grand ballroom of the Fairmont Hotel
atop Nob Hill. I was there for a banquet sponsored by the think tank where I
worked. Someone brought over Milton and Rose Friedman to introduce them.
Of course I knew who they were. I had watched Free to
Choose on television. I had read the book. Earlier I had read Capitalism and
Freedom. I had followed his career for years. So, I was more than thrilled to
meet someone I considered a hero.
Now, so many news accounts of his life have referred
to him as a “giant” in his field. He was called “larger than life”. So perhaps
it would come to many as a great surprise that he was not much over 5 feet
tall. And I have to admit that was the first thing that struck me when he came
walking up to me with Rose at his size; she stood no taller than he did.
My first thought, which I did not express, was: “Dr.
Friedman, you write so much taller.” And he did. He wrote the words of
greatness. He wrote about high ideals and principle.
So many publications in the last day have referred to
him as a “conservative” yet he was no such thing. He was a great and passionate
liberal—a real liberal—a classical liberal—a libertarian.
Many people forget that Friedman as an adviser to
Richard Nixon was a major proponent for abolishing military conscription. This
was an issue strongly embraced by the New Left, but they had no ability to
implement it. Friedman worked hard to end forced service to the military. And
the Left typically ignored that or, more likely, just never bothered to find
out the truth.
In his later years Friedman was one of the most vocal
advocates of legalizing drugs. He said the war on drugs was a disaster. It
eroded personal liberty, corrupted the police, expanded state power, wasted
billions of dollars, made the streets less safe and made drugs more dangerous; at the same time it managed to do almost
nothing to prevent the use of drugs.
Friedman also was a major advocate of helping America’s
poor by making it possible for them to get quality education, something denied
in government schools—especially the schools of the inner city. He pushed for a
voucher system where a portion of the funding the state would spend on a
student’s education could be given directly to the parents to help them afford
private education.
Of course, the teacher’s unions did not want
competition. And, if they had to screw over the poor to feather their nest,
they were happy to do so. Not only did Friedman push for school choice for the
poor, but he poured a great deal of his own money into establishing the Milton
and Rose D. Friedman Foundation to educate and lobby for increased choice in
education.
It was clear that Milton Friedman was a man with a
passion for the freedom and dignity of the individual. He was against
conscription because it violated that freedom and dignity. He was against the
war on drugs because it made life far worse for the people it was ostensibly
meant to help. He wanted all children to have access to a quality education and
he knew enough economics to know that a state monopoly was not the means to
achieve that end.
That evening we spoke briefly. And the name of a minor
Austrian economist and vocal critic of Friedman’s came up. Friedman said
something that I strongly disagreed with at the time. But out of respect I
didn’t challenge him. I later read an interview with him where he said that one
thing he missed, as his fame spread, was people arguing with him and telling
him he was wrong. He said that one of the things he really appreciated about
Rose, his wife of 68 years, was that she never hesitated to tell him he was
wrong.
After reading that I wish I had debated a bit but then
again I’m glad I didn’t. Some years later it is I who changed my mind and have
since come around to agreeing with Friedman.
In 1989 I began organizing a conference that would
take place in San Francisco. This was a massive, several day event with close
to 40 speakers from around the world, and, for the closing banquet, I wanted
Milton Friedman as the speaker.
Of course, Friedman was world-famous. He had won his
Nobel Prize in economics, his TV series Free to Choose, and the subsequent book,
had been wildly popular. He had just been honored by the president. He easily
commanded a speaking fee of $10,000 and often did.
So I sat down and wrote him a letter. I explained to
him that at this conference there were few or no academics. These were not the
elite of the business world. These were the average advocates of freedom. Most
were working people. They held down jobs, but they were passionate about the
ideals that Friedman espoused. I asked him if he would consider speaking and pointed
out that the hotel was just a few blocks from his home and he was free to talk
on any topic he wished.
A week or so later I got a letter from Dr. Friedman
telling me he would be happy to speak.
We had something like 400 people show up for the
banquet that night. And it was such a thrill to have the hotel come and inform
me that Dr. and Mrs. Friedman had arrived. I went out to greet them and escort
them back to our table. I remember walking into the main dining room with these
two lovely people and the entire assembly of 400 gave them a standing ovation.
I brought them to our table and introduced them around
to the other friends who were sitting there that night. In addition to Milton
and Rose and myself, there was my dinner date, Frances Kendell and Leon Louw of
South Africa, Barbara Branden the biographer of Ayn Rand; and Vince Miller.
I know the food was wonderful, but I don’t remember
that. I just remember the thrill of having all that time sitting with Milton
and Rose and talking. And, it was a double thrill since the entirety of Eastern
Europe was in the process of throwing off the yoke of communism. The communist
states were collapsing under their own dead weight.
In my introduction of Dr Friedman I said that if I
were to build a Mount Rushmore of liberty it would include him, FA Hayek,
Ludwig Mises and Ayn Rand. He was most gracious in his thanks and then gave an
“in-house” speech, one to people who already agreed with him. He said that
while he loved speaking to many different groups, it was an evening like this
that really gave him the ability to talk about anything he wanted. So he talked
about libertarianism itself, offering his advice and wisdom on where he thought
libertarians sometimes go wrong.
See the video of that very evening at the end of this essay.
See the video of that very evening at the end of this essay.
He finished to another standing ovation and sat down.
I announced that we would have a few announcements from Vince Miller and then
Dr. Friedman would take questions from the floor. Vince made the announcements
and one of them was to inform guests that we had parking vouchers for the hotel
parking which gave people a discount on their parking. Dr. Friedman leaned over
to me and said: “Make sure I get one of those.”
I was fully aware of what sort of fees this man could
command easily at other dinners. And I knew he was giving his time and efforts
freely, asking nothing in return. So I said: “Dr. Friedman. Don’t worry. We’ll
be happy to pay your parking.”
He smiled and said: “Oh, I don’t mind paying. I just
don’t want to pay full price.”
We both laughed and I pulled one of the vouchers out
of my pocket and handed it to him. As I gave it to him I said: “Well, this has
to be one of the cheapest honorariums you have ever received.”
Ever the gentleman he said: “Any good economist will
tell you that there is a lot more to benefits than just monetary rewards.”
That was a good point and a compliment to all those
who had come to hear him.
I have seen Milton Friedman in action on numerous
occasions, never once did I see him lose his temper. Surely he must have done
so sometimes, but I never heard of it. I remember one day he was speaking at
Stanford University at an event sponsored by student Republicans and student
Libertarians. Friedman explained that while he was a small L libertarian, he
was a Republican out of practical necessity. And once again he was happy to
take questions from the floor.
This was a public forum and the hall was packed, so
there were many opponents of liberty in the audience advocating one form of
state control or another. And, they were not always polite in expressing their
disagreements. But again Friedman was always the gentleman. If you watch the
old Free to Choose series there was a debate that took place after each episode
where Friedman would face some of his staunchest critics. Not once do I
remember him losing his temper regardless of what was said.
I have read the portraits painted of Friedman by the
ideologues of the Left, who apparently share none of his gentlemanly traits or his
general benevolence. I know they never saw how gracious, kind, polite and truly
benevolent Milton Friedman was. Instead, they invented stories about him or
grossly distorted the facts or misquoted him.
I don’t wish
to imply that Milton Friedman was perfect. But, he was the perfect gentleman. While
the economic community may wish to remember his theories, his papers and his
history of monetary policy, what I remember is a gracious and kind man, with an
infectious smile and a genuine sense of humor.
To order a complete DVD set of the original Free to Choose series, go here.
To order a complete DVD set of the original Free to Choose series, go here.
No comments:
Post a Comment