Amit Varma Wins the Bastiat Prize

Posted on by

A hearty SM congrats to Amit Varma of India Uncut who, last night, won this year’s Bastiat Prize.

Pict courtesy of Ultrabrown; Rockstars get bra-throwing female fans; Real rockstars like Amit Varma get Manish Vij as an entourage for the evening.

The Bastiat Prize for Journalism was established by International Policy Network to encourage, recognise and reward writers around the world whose published works elucidate the institutions of the free society.

In the enduring spirit of the Prize’s namesake Frédéric Bastiat, the Prize is given to writers who employ eloquent and witty explanations of complex ideas, combined with a clear understanding of markets and their underlying institutions -property rights, the rule of law, freedom of contract, free speech and limited government. 2007 marks the sixth year of the Bastiat Prize.

Varma’s work has been featured on SM many times before. In addition, his articles have been carried in a number of publications including the Asian Wall Street Journal and, local Indian biz rag, Mint. A collection of his published work can be found here.

Interestingly, while focusing on “old journalism” Varma and at least one other contender for the prize – Jonah Goldberg of National Review’s Corner – are possibly more well known in the blogosphere than they are on dead trees. Varma even credits blogging as the first step on a long path towards press geekdom –

As I mentioned in my post about being nominated, it all began with India Uncut. The blog led to the column, and made me grow as a writer. And I wouldn’t have bothered if no one was reading me. So thank you–you are more a part of this than you realise!

Amit has a great entry in his blog describing the evening in detail and his take on his chances –

My default mode is cynical, and I had been convinced for a few days that I didn’t deserve to win. My three nominated pieces were Where’s the Freedom Party?, A Beast Called Government and The Devil’s Compassion. They were all written fairly early in my stint as columnist at Mint, when I was still getting a handle on tone and suchlike. The first of those piece was clumsily written, even if the content was close to my heart. The second was fairly basic for a sophisticated audience, even if it might have seemed radical to some readers in India. The third, I thought, worked well for me–it was satire, and Bastiat did satire, so that could help.

…The first hint I had that I might win was when the event photographer kept taking pictures of me, more so than of anyone else. “Damn,” I thought, “does this mean I’ll have to give a speech?”

…Then they announced the second prize. Clive Crook.

Two thoughts went through my mhind. One: “This means I’ve won!” Two: “Shit, shit, shit, I might have to speak!”

Congrats. Hope you had a well earned drink and keep up the good work. SM hearts you.

<

p>

UPDATE: The press release announcing Varma’s prize is now up –

Varma was thrilled to receive the Prize, which came with US $10,000 and an engraved crystal candlestick, evocative of Frederic Bastiat’s satirical essay in which the candle makers of France petition the government to block out their competition: the sun. He said:

“Frederic Bastiat is one of my intellectual heroes and his ideas are terribly relevant to modern India. Therefore I’m honored to win the Bastiat Prize, especially given the caliber of the other five finalists in the competition.”

13 thoughts on “Amit Varma Wins the Bastiat Prize”

  3. Good for Varma. But the nominations were diluted with Jonah Goldberg’s name in that list.

  4. Amit’s got a pretty decent blog. I don’t know who Mona Chopra is. But there is link to a pretty interesting topless video and an even more interesting interview in MAXIM – INDIA where she talks about an orgy at 16!

  5. Congratulations Amit.

    Also, I just realized that I completely missed the NREGA post. I work actively in the RTI and NREGA sphere and I would agree that increasing investments in the rural sector would be the best thing to do by the Govt. My biggest problem with NREGA is the scope for corruption, thats what makes it a bad scheme and I would love to see the Govt doing better than this.

    However, I do like NREGA because it is better than the Govt doing nothing at all. It ‘allows’ villagers to develop infrastructure they need and get paid for it. It generates this output during the time between agricultural seasons and thus is not a wealth redistribution scheme as alleged by some. With use of RTI along with NREGA and through public audits which is something being tried, corruption can be reduced and thus it has the potential. The problem is villagers don’t have the required information to take the fight to the Govt. though they have the tools like RTI. It’s not the best solution in the world b far, but it’s better than nothing at all.

  7. I’m a fan of Amit Varma’s India Uncut blog and on many issues an classical economic liberal. That said, I also know that the organization that sponsors the prize is a well-funded corporate lobbying group that is on same side of of every development debate. They are partisan ‘policy entrepreneurs’. To take one instance ‘International Policy Network’ (IPN and affiliates funded by them) have lobbied for the likes of Monsanto in India and their take on TRIPS Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights regimes and pharma patents is blatant corporatism. To be fair they had some sensible positions (though controversial) on the use of DDT against malaria in Africa. See http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Policy_Network for details on the IPN . Full disclosure: I’ve had a one of the directors teach a guest lecture in my Economics grad program. This is not to take away from Amit Varma’s candor as a Hayekian libertarian but it does seem like a writing prize for those who keep their analysis and opinions skewed to that line.

  8. Thanks guys!

    Ardy, a government policy should not be judged by its intent but by its likely outcome in the real world. I had forecast in an AWSJ piece two years ago that the REGB would fail, and the studies that I cited in my recent piece on it provide ample evidence that exactly that has happened. The REGB has the best intentions and noble aims, but given our system of government, the way the incentives are structured, it cannot work in India.

    There are far better ways to generate employment in rural India. They all involve the government doing less, not more.

  9. Ardy, why do you assume that the choice is only between NREGA and government doing “nothing at all”? There is a lot else the government can do that it is not doing. It can revamp the archaic and stifling labor laws, remove the restrictions on farmers selling agricultural land, allow greater private participation in procurement and storage of agricultural products, allow contract farming, and all these things do not need any investment.

    If they have those billions to spend, and if we assume that the government MUST spend it in rural India, they can invest it all in two simple things – electricity and water.

    NREGA is nothing but a political gimmick, a lot like padding a resume.

  10. NREGA is more sinister than a political gimmick. It is an avenue to strengthen the politician-bureaucrat nexus. Analysing “rural upliftment” programs with a cynical lens gets you the truth almost every time. The congress party is amazingly adept at creating programs without any audit capability such that the grassroots (district level politicians and bureacracy) can skim 80% of the money. The other parties are not much better but they do not have the depth of knowledge that the congress has, having run India for 50 out of 60 years.

  13. Amit, Gaurav – I think it’s just a difference in perspective. I am not saying that NREGS is a great plan or that it should have come through. When it came out, I was quite frustrated with it’s obvious political mileage content. But today instead I am coming from the point of view, that now that it is here, I would rather use it as well as I can and maximize what I can get from it. This is still not mutually exclusive from saying that I wont be pro changes in policy and labor laws or accepting that it is a political gimmick, and that better schemes can be brought out. Thus on the issue of minimal government interference for economic growth, I think we are on the same page. And I have already expressed my reservations with it for corruption, the more money these bastards of baburaj have, the more they can exploit it.

    At the same time, and I give more credit to the RTI for that, despite where we are with NREGS, a lot can be improved and more power be given to the rural aam aadmi through good monitoring of schemes (social audits, RTIs) and demanding why NREGS is not being implemented in a certain area again through RTI. This is where some of us work in the NREGS sphere. Hence we try to make a less than perfect system a little less imperfect. Again to beat upon a beaten point, this still does not mean that I am pro big government schemes like NREGS. And from a journalistic point of view Amit, I would rather you not stress upon these things so as to provide the Government less ammo for defending such control intensive schemes.

    Another criticism of NREGS has been (and this I happened to see on IEB) that it is just a capital redistribution scheme, now I am not as sure of that though since I do see a possibility of economic output from this if implemented adequately.

    Anyways, any takes by people on the McKinsey report for the growth of the middle class in the next few years?