Former Estonian Prime Minister Mart Laar Wins Friedman Prize for Liberty
From Cato.org:
The Cato Institute today announced that the recipient of the 2006 Milton Friedman Prize for Advancing Liberty is Mart Laar, the former prime minister of Estonia and main architect of his country's remarkable economic transformation into one of the world's freest and most dynamic economies.
The prize and its accompanying $500,000 cash award will be presented to Laar on May 18 at the Drake Hotel in Chicago. Named after Nobel laureate Milton Friedman, the prize is awarded every other year to an individual who has made a significant contribution to advancing human freedom. The Friedman Prize went to the late British economist Peter Bauer in 2002 and to the Peruvian economist Hernando de Soto in 2004.
Upon hearing that he had been chosen as the third recipient of the prize, Laar said: "I am very happy and proud to receive such an important prize. The Milton Friedman Prize is especially important to me as I am such an admirer of Milton Freidman's works and I am proud that we succeeded to prove in Estonia that Milton Friedman's ideas really work. This is not a prize for me but to all my fellow Estonians, who have made the Estonian miracle possible."
Throughout his public life, Laar has embodied the values of liberty and free choice recognized by the prize, and his dedication to these ideals helped him to lead his country to economic prosperity through a radical free market program.
Today, Estonia is hailed as a model for emerging democracies and is cited as an example that ailing Western European economies should follow too. Consistently near the top of the Economic Freedom of the World Index, Estonia is now a member of NATO, the EU and the WTO, with well over 90 percent of its formerly state-run economy privatized.
When Laar took the reins of power of the newly independent country in 1992, he was only 32 years old, and Estonia was struggling to heal from the wounds of Soviet occupation. Laar believed that the way to ensure success for Estonia was to cultivate freedom and self-determination. In only two years in office, he negotiated the withdrawal of Russian troops from Estonian soil and introduced the kroon, one of Eastern Europe's most stable currencies. He also instituted a flat tax rate, a move, which has been widely copied . even in Russia. Under Laar, Estonia removed price controls, discounted useless regulations, and saw the largest real per capita income of any of the former Communist states.
But as Laar, who served two terms as prime minister, has pointed out, he is not an economist: "I had read only one book on economics . Milton Friedman's Free to Choose. I was so ignorant at the time that I thought that what Friedman wrote about the benefits of privatization, the flat tax and the abolition of all customs rights, was the result of economic reforms that had been put into practice in the West. It seemed common sense to me and, as I thought it had already been done everywhere, I simply introduced it in Estonia, despite warnings from Estonian economists that it could not be done. They said it was as impossible as walking on water. We did it: we just walked on the water because we did not know that it was impossible."
"Mart Laar, who was inspired by Milton Friedman, is the perfect Friedman Prize winner," said Ed Crane, president and CEO of the Cato Institute. "His courageous program as Estonia's prime minister created the 'Baltic Tiger,' a free and prosperous nation that is a model for the world to emulate. Laar's selection again underscores the international nature of the Milton Friedman Prize for Advancing Liberty."
In 2001, Friedman agreed to lend his name to the award. He said in a statement about the award: "Those of us who were fortunate enough to live and be raised in a reasonably free society tend to underestimate the importance of freedom. We tend to take it for granted. It has made us in the West more complacent, so having a prize emphasizing liberty is extremely important."
This is an recognition that is well earned.
Perhaps Estonia's success can teach other 'advanced' nations the value inherent in the concept of personal liberty.
Antisemitism
107. There are currently approximately 3,000 Jews in Estonia. Although there is no institutionalized antisemitism in Estonia and the 27th of January has, since 2003, been commemorated as the Holocaust Memorial Day, ECRI notes that the manner in which the Holocaust and the Second Wold War is viewed tends to minimize the gravity of this period in history. Representatives of the Jewish community have thus informed ECRI that many Estonians view the Nazi occupation in a more positive light than the Soviet occupation. In this regard, a new Law on the Memory of the Victims of the Holocaust, Deportation and Other Victims of Crimes against Humanity was adopted in 2003. Whilst welcoming the adoption of this Law, ECRI hopes that it will provide an opportunity for people in Estonia to better understand the seriousness and full horror of the Holocaust.
108. ECRI has been informed that in August 2004, a monument commemorating Estonians who fought alongside the Waffen SS was unveiled in Lihula (in the Western part of the country). Although the Government removed it soon thereafter, ECRI notes there were demonstrations in favour of keeping this monument in place. Moreover, ECRI also notes that on 2 March 2005, a former soldier in the Estonian SS legion who was protesting against the decision to remove the monument in Lihula wrote an incendiary article in a newspaper published by the Centrist Party in Estonia, in breach of Article 151 of the Criminal Code. ECRI has no information on whether this person has been or will be prosecuted. It therefore hopes that the authorities will duly punish any such acts in order to send a clear message that they are unacceptable.
Heh
I'm having trouble figuring out the purpose of the above post. As a preliminary matter, I fail to see the antisemitism in either example. Estonia has been recently under both Nazi and Soviet rule. The Nazi regime in Estonia was relatively brief in comparison to that of the Soviets. It isn't terribly surprising people who suffer under the yoke of one oppresser view prior regimes as freer than they actually were. In addition, every nation needs heros and most of those national heros, for better or worse, come from military moments. The SS was an abhorent organization and I ordinarily would be the first to line up in protest. But according to your citation, the monument isn't about the amazing SS and their incredible Jew Killing Machine. Instead, the monument pays tribute those who stood with the SS in defense of Estonia. As I mentioned before, for better or worse, Estonia has (and should have) an entirely different perspective on World War II and the Cold War than those of us sitting here in the States.
At any rate, even if these two incidents somehow proved that Estonia is a place that permits people to run around wearing Nazi armbands, isn't that called freedom of speech? I thought the Friedman Prize was all about promoting liberty. Can't we all agree that a land where all viewpoints are heard is freer and contains more liberty than one where it isn't? If Vovan's insinuation is true, then doesn't that provide just one more example of the freedom that Estonia now enjoys (especially given its statist past)?
Considering more than half of my family died in the holocaust and in the war, I somehow fail to see the erection of the monument honoring soldiers that were not only fighting alongside the Nazi regime, but also include war criminals, as an example of the shining beacon of freedom. Furhtermore, the continuing policies of "economic progress" at the expense of the 27% of population, also strike me as somewhat dubious achievements. But hey, of course to you it might be more examples of freedom for the Esonians - well at least those who possessed Estonian citizenship before 1940. Those human rights sure are overrated nowadays.
Considering more than half of my family died in the holocaust and in the war, I somehow fail to see the erection of the monument honoring soldiers that were not only fighting alongside the Nazi regime, but also include war criminals, as an example of the shining beacon of freedom.
My heartfelt condolences to your loss. I lost all but four members of my family from the Holocaust as well. But this isn't about how many people each of us lost to Hitler's hate machine. This is about whether the posting of the statute which you argue displays virulent anti-semites means that Estonia (and by inference Mart Laar) is less free than it was before Laar took office.
As I said previously, I don't agree with the initial decision to put up the monument. At best, it is in bad taste and displays a significant indifference to the evils of the men displayed. However, I am not Estonian. The initial reaction by the Estonians, according to the citations you provided, was that this was a memorial to war heroes.
Your response, at its core, suggests that incidents like the monument suggest an indifference to hatred and a lack of tolerance. First, the monument came down. The indicates at least some level of concern for minority views. Second, whether you or I particularly like the Estonian government's "head in the sand or worse" approach to evil is beside the point. You pointed out that when the monument was removed, there were:
demonstrations in favour of keeping this monument in place
Isn't that exactly what freedom is? If you and I don't like the ultimate decision by the Estonian people, we have every right to send letters, petition our own government to change its policies, etc. Whether we like it or not, liberty means that the Estonians have the right to do the same thing. In sum, liberty isn't liberty if you won't defend someone's right to support bad things.
As a rebuttal, you now cite an article which says that the Roma community is still discriminated against in employment and education. I can't really argue against the truth of those statements because I really haven't researched the issue. Assuming that this is true, how does this support the idea that Estonia is less free or robust than it was prior to Laar? Estonia has a long way to go before perfect liberty is reached. News flash: so does America. But Estonia moved pretty far, pretty fast, in the area of liberty. And isn't that the whole idea of the award in the first place? Dubious achievment indeed.
I agree with you, but my purpose was to highlight some of the means used by the Estonian government both to achieve desirable economic policies, and promote national pride - the monument still stands - even though it is on private land, and other concerns have not been addressed.
Clearly Estonia is one of the more advanced countries in from the former Eastern Block, in a large part due to the Mart Laar, however, the European Community generally closes its eyes at the behavior of Baltic states, and while Estonia undoubtedly belongs in the European Union, more scrutiny towards it would go a long way in promoting economic and political freedom for some without abridging it for others - but I guess you cannot blame Laar for that.
The first article you cited complained that someone wasn't prosecuted for free speech. That's hardly supportive of your point that Estonia isn't free. That sounds like the Council of Europe is complaining that Estonia is too free.
And while I lost plenty of family members to the Holocaust also, and I'd be happy to see former war criminals drawn and quartered before being tossed into a vat of boiling oil, the fact that the Simon Wiesenthal center thinks that Estonia isn't pursuing 90-year old people vigorously enough for actions of 60 years ago doesn't exactly seem like a damning indictment to me of the country's freedom.
Someone mentioned that all countries should become more like Estonia. I pointed out some unsavory (TO ME) particulars of of Estonian society, such as the Nazi memorial, and the economic/political discrimination against the ethnic Russians.
If you find that aformentioned things do not diminish the positive results of Estonian developement - power to you, we'll then just agree to disagree
Not a ringing endorsement for European Union membership.
And why is that, because they are lazy, shiftless, grifters who kidnap children and "gyp" people? Gee, isn't that what Hitler said about the Jews, and oh, yeah, the Gypsies (Roma).
So apparently all you have to do is impose a "flat tax" and the libertarians just fall all over themselves in adoration.
He did not negotiate the withdrawal of Russian troops from Estonia, he actually got stuck with the negotiations. The agreement was signed by the late president Meri (who was strongly accused by Laar's party for doing this, because the agreement included some guarantees for retired Russian military servicepeople).
He did not introduce the Estonian currency (kroon). Kroon was in place by summer of 1992; Laar became the PM in late autumn of 1992.
He is not the person to be credited with abolishing price regulations, either. Prices were pretty much free before he took office.
However, he did initiate many economic reforms and he deserves credit for that.
Hmm, and it seems it was just like yesterday that Eugene was saying good Americans would never give apoligists for the Nazis a pass like certain people give traitorous apologists for Stalin like Pete Seeger a pass.
What delicious irony.
I think the point here isn't that it's wrong to allow these views to be spoken, but the fact that the views are held at all. If the same people held those views but didn't speak them, it would be as bad, it would just be harder for us to know about it.
Estonia's flat tax solves half of the problem, and evidently remedies against the other half are being gradually introduced.
(BTW, the income tax rate is only a portion of any country's overall rate of taxation.)