On July 31st, we celebrated Milton Friedman’s 95th birthday. The Friedman Legacy for Freedom event was sponsored by in part by the Milton and Rose D. Friedman Foundation, Americans for Tax Reform, and the Grassroot Institute of Hawaii. I attended the event as an intern with the Grassroot Institute.

The event had two main goals. The first was to remember Milton Friedman and his contributions to economics and public policy. This was largely accomplished with our keynote speaker, Doug Bandow. The second was to meet other supporters and friends of Friedman.

At the beginning of the formal portion of the event, many of the attendees were introduced. A few of the attendees we heard from included Steve Jacobson of the Federalist Society, Sam Slom, President of Small Business Hawaii, and Bill Burgess on behalf of the Pacific Legal Foundation.

As an intern, I had the opportunity to meet people with political values similar to mine. Networking and sharing ideas is obviously important, no matter which field of endeavor one pursues, but especially so in politics.

After the introductions, Doug Bandow spoke on key points on Milton Friedman’s life. According to Bandow, Friedman did not know of his initial political convictions and beleived he was probably a socialist. While I was initially surprised to learn this, it is encouraging to realize that Friedman changed his convictions and became one of the most influential free-market activists. His life and work proved individuyals could eventually learn the value of the free-market and make great changes because of this.

Friedman is also remembered for his calm demeanor. In a 15-person committee with 5 members undecided and 5 members for the draft, Friedman was one of 5 members against the military draft. By the end of the commission, which ended ahead of schedule, the committee presented a unanimous recommendation to end the draft. Friedman’s personality and wit could freeze even the most inflamed opponent, and he is often remembered for the exchange in which he silenced General Westmoreland by comparing drafted soldiers to slaves. Stories like these encourage me to keep engaging in dialogues with people, even if at first they may be of the opposite opinion.

Lastly, I learned that Friedman was a utilitarian and whenever practical, sought compromises. From someone like myself who supports a complete separation between school and state, school vouchers seem to be a compromise. Yet one could point out that vouchers have actually been implemented in several different school districts, and we are now more able to demonstrate how effective school choice is. And a liberal co-worker of mine at college admitted that while he greatly disliked Friedman’s work, Friedman was still an important economist.

People advocate for freedom in many different ways, some arguments more successful than others. Unlike Friedman, I would not consider city parks “public goods.” Instead, I would advocate for parks to be considered another business that one may provide—apart from the government. But Friedman has been a persistent and successful free-market promoter. And likewise, we must continue the fight.