Decline and fall of the Nobel Peace Prize

[SticksandStones]

Why didn't they just give the award to the city of San Francisco then.

The general consensus seems to be that he was awarded the prize for not being Bush and saying he's going to do a lot of stuff. Hilary must be pretty pissed at the moment. She just lost out on a nobel prize.

Because the city of San Francisco isn't in charge of the country who's policies pretty much dictate everything else in the world.

 

[noblegas]

Apart from the obvious hypocrisy of anyone having nuclear weapons, we don't have terrorist organizations within our government who's idea of fighting a war is strapping a bomb to one of your own men and blowing him up in a crowded civilian area. I think we are worried about who will end up with the weapons once they are being produced. The only reason the Cold War stayed cold is due to mutually assured destruction... What happens when one person doesn't care if they are killed?

Unfortunately this is getting off topic. I'll refrain from arguing any more on this point in this thread.

Yeah, I don't want to stray off topic anymore either. But I will make one final response: the US has supported or allowed terrorism within our on borders(KKK terrorizing blacks and other non-whites in the south and elsewhere, invading and masscrating the lands of the native americans to make way for american settlements) and abroad(Israel was created based on terrorists acts, for 1 million palestinians were expelled from their home, many considered dropping two nuclear bombs on innocent civilians and detoppling newly form democracy in third world countries and replacing them with dictatorships could be considered acts of terrorism. )

 

[Hans de Vries]

The general consensus seems to be that he was awarded the prize for not being Bush and saying he's going to do a lot of stuff. Hilary must be pretty pissed at the moment. She just lost out on a nobel prize.

In that case Bush may be really pissed off that he didn't share in the Noble price, since if it
wasn't for his hard work all those years then Obama wouldn't have had a change...

Regards, Hans

 

[Pengwuino]

Because the city of San Francisco isn't in charge of the country who's policies pretty much dictate everything else in the world.

It was a joke.

A lot of the reactions about his getting the Nobel Prize make me wonder how stupid are people anyhow. If people believe him receiving this prize is going to help him in whatever he does, how dumb are the people who he will have conferences with/debate with/whatever be? The Prize now seems practically worthless (+ 1.3 million dollars), so what merit does it hold? Is some country going to say "You know what, we were on the fence about building a nuclear weapon, but you having that Prize tipped us in favor of not doing it". I mean really, what does having that Prize bring to the table that Obama minus the Prize can't?

 

[cristo]

Because the city of San Francisco isn't in charge of the country who's policies pretty much dictate everything else in the world.

Gotta love the arrogance of (some of) you yanks

 

[arildno]

The Prize now seems practically worthless (+ 1.3 million dollars), so what merit does it hold?

3 individuals (i.e the majority within the NC committe) determine each year who gets the Nobel Peace Prize.

In order to maintain the Prize's status, those 3 cannot do as they chose to do this year.


The Nobel Peace Prize has managed to maintain some political relevance, because former members of the NC knew that it was not their job to play politics, but rather, to give due recognition for a work well done.


The present committe represents a new step in the politization, and process of self-destruction, of the Nobel Peace Prize.

 

[turbo]

3 individuals (i.e the majority within the NC committe) determine each year who gets the Nobel Peace Prize.

In order to maintain the Prize's status, those 3 cannot do as they chose to do this year.


The Nobel Peace Prize has managed to maintain some political relevance, because former members of the NC knew that it was not their job to play politics, but rather, to give due recognition for a work well done.


The present committe represents a new step in the politization, and process of self-destruction, of the Nobel Peace Prize.

Is that really the case? Did not the original prize embody a kind of political activism? As in: "We recognize your goals and ambitions and wish to free you from some financial constraints and encourage you to continue your work."?

There are some dead people who did some valuable work and whose foundations might benefit greatly from the monetary portion of the peace prize, but they are ineligible. I thought that this was because their necritude prevents them from continuing their work, though I could be wrong.

BTW, I thought the prize was way premature. Obama has to do a lot more than dial back US unilateralism and agree to talk with some governments that have been long-regarded as pariahs by US ideologues (left and right) before we can expect real progress toward world peace. Congress appropriates money, but the President has veto power. I hope Obama has the cojones to veto military aid to countries that come to us begging for money, and then squander it and/or refuse to engage with us in conflict-resolution in their regions.

 

[Astronuc]

Is that really the case? Did not the original prize embody a kind of political activism? As in: "We recognize your goals and ambitions and wish to free you from some financial constraints and encourage you to continue your work."?

And Obama is not financially constrained the way many others are. He just signs the bills that Congress writes.

There are some dead people who did some valuable work and whose foundations might benefit greatly from the monetary portion of the peace prize, but they are ineligible. I thought that this was because their necritude prevents them from continuing their work, though I could be wrong.

Nobel's are not awarded posthumously, but in the case of the Peace Prize, institutions can be awarded the prize, even if one of their primary persons is deceased.

BTW, I thought the prize was way premature.

It is WAY, WAY premature. The horse just left the gate, and a whole lot of race remains to be run.

 

[WhoWee]

I'm actually going to defend Obama. An award of this magnitude, this early in his career, is clearly too soon. This is going to put very high expectations on him as well as much closer scrutiny.

This is from Time.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20091009/us_time/08599192939500
"The last thing Barack Obama needed at this moment in his presidency and our politics is a prize for a promise.

Inspirational words have brought him a long way - including to the night in Grant Park less than a year ago when he asked that we "join in the work of remaking this nation the only way it's been done in America for two-hundred and twenty-one years - block by block, brick by brick, calloused hand by calloused hand." (See pictures of Obama in Grant Park.)

By now there are surely more callouses on his lips than his hands. He, like every new president, has reckoned with both the power and the danger of words, dangers that are especially great for one who wields them as skillfully as he. A promise beautifully made raises hopes especially high: we will revive the economy while we rein in our spending; we will make health care simpler, safer, cheaper, fairer. We will rid the Earth of its most lethal weapons. We will turn green and clean. We will all just get along. (See pictures of eight months of Obama's diplomacy.)

So when reality bites, it chomps down hard. The Nobel committee cited "his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples." His critics fault some of those efforts: those who favor a missile shield for Poland or a troop surge in Afghanistan or a harder line on Iran. But even his fans know that none of the dreams have yet come true, and a prize for even dreaming them can feed the illusion that they have. (See the Top 10 Obama Backlash Moments)"

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/10/09/nobel.peace.prize/index.html

I'm looking for a link that will prove/disprove that voting was cut off in February 2009 - just weeks after Obama took office. Does anyone know the definitive cut-off date for nominations or when the actual voting took place?

 

[Cyrus]

He should give the prize to someone that deserves it.

 

[Astronuc]

I'm looking for a link that will prove/disprove that voting was cut off in February 2009 - just weeks after Obama took office. Does anyone know the definitive cut-off date for nominations or when the actual voting took place?

http://nobelprize.org/nomination/peace/process.html

The process diagram indicates that in February and March, a group generates a shortlist, then the list is reviewed from March to August, and the prize winners are chosen in October.

 

[Pengwuino]

He should give the prize to someone that deserves it.

I can imagine Kanye West interrupting Obama when he receives the award and declares Beyonce deserved the Peace Prize instead.

 

[turbo]

Obama has already said that the monetary prize will be donated to charity.

 

[jobyts]

Here's the mail I got today afternoon from the President...
I hope he won't mind if I forward the mail to the PF folks.

Jobyts --

This morning, Michelle and I awoke to some surprising and humbling news. At 6 a.m., we received word that I'd been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009.

To be honest, I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who've been honored by this prize -- men and women who've inspired me and inspired the entire world through their courageous pursuit of peace.

But I also know that throughout history the Nobel Peace Prize has not just been used to honor specific achievement; it's also been used as a means to give momentum to a set of causes.

That is why I've said that I will accept this award as a call to action, a call for all nations and all peoples to confront the common challenges of the 21st century. These challenges won't all be met during my presidency, or even my lifetime. But I know these challenges can be met so long as it's recognized that they will not be met by one person or one nation alone.

This award -- and the call to action that comes with it -- does not belong simply to me or my administration; it belongs to all people around the world who have fought for justice and for peace. And most of all, it belongs to you, the men and women of America, who have dared to hope and have worked so hard to make our world a little better.

So today we humbly recommit to the important work that we've begun together. I'm grateful that you've stood with me thus far, and I'm honored to continue our vital work in the years to come.

Thank you,

President Barack Obama

 

[Astronuc]

Here's the mail I got today afternoon from the President...
I hope he won't mind if I forward the mail to the PF folks.

Hmmm - he left out the DONATE button.

 

[Pengwuino]

Here's the mail I got today afternoon from the President...
I hope he won't mind if I forward the mail to the PF folks.

I love this part

Jobyts --

This morning, Michelle and I awoke to some surprising and humbling news. At 6 a.m., we received word that I'd been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009.

Reminds me of how my friends use to call each other in real life by their world of warcraft names.

Oh and if you replaced your real name by your PF names for privacy issues, don't tell us, it's way funnier this way.

 

[lisab]

I love this part



Reminds me of how my friends use to call each other in real life by their world of warcraft names.

Oh and if you replaced your real name by your PF names for privacy issues, don't tell us, it's way funnier this way.

Maybe that is his (her?) real name. I assume yours is real too.

 

[Pengwuino]

Maybe that is his (her?) real name. I assume yours is real too.

That's Mr. Pengwuino to you.

 

[mheslep]

There were so many opportunities for powerful political and diplomatic wins here in declining the prize - it stuns me that Obama failed to do so.

• In one stroke it would have squashed all of the 'messiah', 'in love with his image', 9000 camera appearances a day, too much celebrity criticisms levelled at him.
• He could have held the podium for an hour speaking persuasively about what the prize should mean, I think without sounding unappreciative, to include comparisons to American leadership in the past from the likes of Theodore Roosevelt.
• He could have named any number of deserving candidates to great effect around the world:
  -Any one of the more peaceful dissidents in Iran; thus pressure the mullahs and protect the dissidents via prestige. Only with the help of dissidents will Iran's bomb making plans will be stopped.
  -Iraqi leadership. The world's eye is off of Iraq now, but there is no guarantee that it will continue in relative calm. Pointing out a candidate there, like say al-Sistani who is widely respected and consistently called for peace throughout the worst of the violence and at great danger to himself would go further to improve the odds.
  -Burma. Recall the massacre of the monks 2007? Put the spotlight back on Rangoon.
  -Envoys Holbrooke and Mitchell are both deserving, a shout out from the podium must aid their negotiating positions.

 

[Hurkyl]

That's Mr. Pengwuino to you.

Mister? That's a funny title for a bird.

 

[Pengwuino]

There were so many opportunities for powerful political and diplomatic wins here in declining the prize - it stuns me that Obama failed to do so.

BUT, it would remove all doubt that the Peace Prize is completely political. It would do too much damage to the Prize's reputation and to people who have already received it who genuinely deserved it. If he accepts it, you can at least argue that it was simply a big big stretch to give it to him or at the worst, a mistake. If the recipient doesn't even accept it with these circumstances, that's even worse than saying it's a mistake IMHO.

I see it as saying, for example, how a referee calls something in a sport. If the referee makes a terrible mistake and let's say, people claim its because the referee favors one team, then that's fairly bad. However, if the team the call favored even said it was wrong, that brings the whole system into question; that even people who would benefit call attention to an error is huge.

 

[turbo]

Mister? That's a funny title for a bird.

Pairs of Mr. Pengwuinos have happily protected and incubated eggs and hatched and reared the chicks.

 

[Hurkyl]

It would do too much damage to the Prize's reputation

Damaging an undeserved prestigious reputation is a good thing -- I don't see how Obama declining would do too much.

 

[lisab]

In the near future, President Obama will make a difficult decision about Afghanistan. How ironic will it be should he decide to send in ~40,000 more troops (quite possible, maybe even likely)?

And [STRIKE]I want to believe that this award will affect that decision[/STRIKE]...I really don't think it will.

oops, edit: I want to believe it *won't* affect that decision!

 

[Hurkyl]

And I want to believe that this award will affect that decision...I really don't think it will.

I want my elected leaders to make decisions based on available facts and designed to best achieve good^* goals.

A leader whose decisions are influenced by silly political stunts like this is exactly what I don't want.


*: I won't attempt a definition of "good"

 

[mheslep]

BUT, it would remove all doubt that the Peace Prize is completely political. It would do too much damage to the Prize's reputation and to people who have already received it who genuinely deserved it. If he accepts it, you can at least argue that it was simply a big big stretch to give it to him or at the worst, a mistake. If the recipient doesn't even accept it with these circumstances, that's even worse than saying it's a mistake IMHO.

I see it as saying, for example, how a referee calls something in a sport. If the referee makes a terrible mistake and let's say, people claim its because the referee favors one team, then that's fairly bad. However, if the team the call favored even said it was wrong, that brings the whole system into question; that even people who would benefit call attention to an error is huge.

I agree - we are in the latter condition, and thus the need to take this opportunity to stop the slouch towards empty meaning. Obama could have done that today in an hour. It need not have been all critical either. Presidents, good ones, are adept at saying 'look how great this could be' without scolding.

 

[turbo]

Damaging an undeserved prestigious reputation is a good thing -- I don't see how Obama declining would do too much.

I'm with you on this one. Obama could have said something like "I have not accomplished enough to warrant this prestigious honor, and I ask that the committee please accept my heartfelt appreciation, and choose an alternate recipient. Please choose somebody who has already accomplished much to advance world peace, and who might have some financial constraints limiting their work that this prize might alleviate, so that they can continue their work, and perhaps expand their influence and magnify the good that they have already accomplished." No harm, no foul. Obama comes off as gracious (when is he not?), the committee gets to continue their work and re-evaluate the nominees, and everybody (including Obama) benefits when the award is made. If a woman in a Muslim regime like Indonesia or a repressive state like Myanmar got the prize for trying to secure basic freedoms for other women or dissidents in general, would that be so bad? Just think - $1.3M is going to go a hell of a lot further in a 3rd world country than it would here. Sometimes, establishing little pockets of freedom and justice can advance the cause of a greater peace, since terrorism is so frequently brewing in places that enjoy neither.

 

[mheslep]

Damaging an undeserved prestigious reputation is a good thing -- I don't see how Obama declining would do too much.

Exactly

 

[lisab]

I want my elected leaders to make decisions based on available facts and designed to best achieve good^* goals.

A leader whose decisions are influenced by silly political stunts like this is exactly what I don't want.


*: I won't attempt a definition of "good"

Oops, see my edited post.

 

[rootX]

He is too sexy when he is on the stage.

Or,

maybe judges wanted to have influence on Obama's future decisions.

 

[Pengwuino]

I'm with you on this one. Obama could have said something like "I have not accomplished enough to warrant this prestigious honor, and I ask that the committee please accept my heartfelt appreciation, and choose an alternate recipient. Please choose somebody who has already accomplished much to advance world peace, and who might have some financial constraints limiting their work that this prize might alleviate, so that they can continue their work, and perhaps expand their influence and magnify the good that they have already accomplished." No harm, no foul. Obama comes off as gracious (when is he not?), the committee gets to continue their work and re-evaluate the nominees, and everybody (including Obama) benefits when the award is made. If a woman in a Muslim regime like Indonesia or a repressive state like Myanmar got the prize for trying to secure basic freedoms for other women or dissidents in general, would that be so bad? Just think - $1.3M is going to go a hell of a lot further in a 3rd world country than it would here. Sometimes, establishing little pockets of freedom and justice can advance the cause of a greater peace, since terrorism is so frequently brewing in places that enjoy neither.

This is thinking only about the present though. What about next year? or the year after? Unless you're idealistic like you're being and they give it to someone who is unquestionably worthy of the prize, you'll have controversy over its awarding since now the political factor will be even more apparent.

 

[Hurkyl]

This is thinking only about the present though. What about next year? or the year after? Unless you're idealistic like you're being and they give it to someone who is unquestionably worthy of the prize, you'll have controversy over its awarding since now the political factor will be even more apparent.

Er, I do want them awarding the prize to someone who is unquestionably worthy.

 

[Pengwuino]

Er, I do want them awarding the prize to someone who is unquestionably worthy.

Except it's already known they don't and haven't at times. This just makes it worse.

 

[mheslep]

I toss my shoe, steel toed boots, and everything else nearby at the smug Crowley:

Certainly from our standpoint, this gives us a sense of momentum -- when the United States has accolades tossed its way, rather than shoes.

http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/10/state-dept-better-to-get-thrown-accolades-than-shoes.php

 

[lisab]

Here's the mail I got today afternoon from the President...
I hope he won't mind if I forward the mail to the PF folks.

OK, I just checked my hotmail account and I got the same letter. But I don't understand the subject title: "Not the first, but the last". Huh?