Decline and fall of the Nobel Peace Prize

[Hans de Vries]

Why?

Because everyone you speak to says so, Hans?

Do you even have a criterion to distinguish between "right-wing" and "left-wing"?

There are decades of political party histories, known to those who actively follow
international politics, but you can also simply Google for yourself...


Regards, Hans.

 

[arildno]

I didn't say I don't have a working concept of what "right-wing" or "left-wing" means, Hans.

But on basis of your rambling posts, I have serious doubts if you have, or ever have had, any such concept.

That's why I asked you.

 

[humanino]

Why?

Because everyone you speak to says so, Hans?

Do you even have a criterion to distinguish between "right-wing" and "left-wing"?

arildno knows better (who they should choose) than the Nobel peace prize committee and also better (whether they themselves classify left or right) than the most important political professionals in the world.

I realize we should have awarded all Nobel prizes to arildno !

 

[Hans de Vries]

The views of most European rightwingers are more similar to US Democrats than Republicans.

Both right wing and left wing politicians have become more moderate over
the years. Conservatives are lot less nationalist and xenophobic as the were
in the past in Europe, mostly because they speak enough languages nowadays
to communicate with each other...Regards, Hans

 

[arildno]

arildno knows better (who they should choose) than the Nobel peace prize committee

Certainly.
Because I happen to know what individuals make up that committee. You don't.

and also better (whether they themselves classify left or right) than the most important political professionals in the world.

So Hans de Vries is a professional politician?

Doesn't surprise me, really..

 

[humanino]

So Hans de Vries is a professional politician?

I do not believe Hans is a professional politician.

you can classify as right-wing:

NATO SECRETARY GENERAL ANDERS FOGH RASMUSSEN
FRENCH PRESIDENT NICOLAS SARKOZY
ANGELA MERKEL, GERMAN CHANCELLOR

Why?

I now that Sarkozy, Merkel and Rasmussen are professional politicians and classify themselves (centre-)right.

 

[Hans de Vries]

I do not believe Hans is a professional politician.

No thanks , just an active observer...

I now that Sarkozy, Merkel and Rasmussen are professional politicians and classify themselves (centre-)right.

and that's what counts, just like how their political parties classify themselves
and how their voters classify themselves.

Regards, Hans

 

[arildno]

I know that Sarkozy, Merkel and Rasmussen are professional politicians and classify themselves (centre-)right

And when did (centre-)right become right-WING, dears?

 

[WhoWee]

No it doesn't. It just shows Nejad to be a hypocrite. He needs to clean up his own house before telling Barack what to do.
If anything, the award, and the support of major world leaders, gives Obama the go ahead with his diabolical plans to create a better world.

ring in his nose, my a**...

Time will tell. I think giving him the award now is a brilliant way to control him.

He is now going to have his feet held to the fire for EVERY promise he's ever made. He will also be expected to live up to the Award on the world wide stage. However, he must also put the national interests of the US in front of other interests. This may be the "test" that VP Biden was talking about.

 

[f95toli]

And when did (centre-)right become right-WING, dears?

When the royalist in France ended up sittting on right side of the chamber?

Why is is that so many people seem to think that the right wing is the same as the New Right in the US? The latter has only been around for about 30 years and so and doesn't even "fit" on the normal poltical spectrum.

All conservative and liberal politicans belong to the right wing of politics, and a christian-democratic conservative party as Merkel's CDU is most certainly a right-wing party.
"Right-wing" doesn't mean "far right" any more than left-wing means "communist" (or even socialist), it just means right of the centre.
Both e.g Hoyre and Fremskrittspartiet in Norway are definately right-wing parties (and the latter are quite far right by European standards).

 

[russ_watters]

Ugh. I do not have time to read all 6,789,651,131 Tom, Dick, and Harry's opinions on the matter. I was supposed to be at the coast an hour ago. Please have someone have the graphs and pie charts ready when I get back tomorrow. Ciao.

So, what you're saying is that the only opinions that matter to you are those of world leaders, who for reasons of political expedience must not come out against it? Talk about confirmation bias! Jeez!

 

[russ_watters]

you can classify as right-wing:

NATO SECRETARY GENERAL ANDERS FOGH RASMUSSEN
FRENCH PRESIDENT NICOLAS SARKOZY
ANGELA MERKEL, GERMAN CHANCELLOR


and as left wing:

MIKHAIL GORBACHEV, FORMER SOVIET LEADER AND NOBEL PRIZE WINNER
YUKIO HATOYAMA, JAPANESE PRIME MINISTER


Regards, Hans

Have you considered that to a Scandanavian, much of the world communtiy is to the right of center? To an American, I doubt any of those could be considered right of center - much less "right wing"!

According to the wiki on her, Merkel is "center right", Sarkozy's party is "center right" and the General...well, he's a general in a military alliance.

But I suppose to someone far out on the left wing, someone near the center would appear "right wing".

 

[russ_watters]

"Right-wing" doesn't mean "far right" any more than left-wing means "communist" (or even socialist), it just means right of the centre.

Well perhaps this is just a definitions problem - in the US, "right wing" tends to be used synonomously with "far right".

 

[humanino]

the only opinions that matter to you are those of world leaders

Yes indeed, that's obvious. Also, if you have forgotten, for instance France has not hesitated to stand up against your government in the past.

 

[humanino]

But I suppose to someone far out on the left wing, someone near the center would appear "right wing".

Yes indeed, that is a matter of perception. But in this discussion, the perception of american citizens is not so relevant : the reason Obama was chosen is because of his contributions to international politics, which american media barely know even exist.

 

[f95toli]

Well perhaps this is just a definitions problem - in the US, "right wing" tends to be used synonomously with "far right".

Yes, I realize that; but historically that is incorrect and it is not what "right wing" means in Europe or -as far as I know- anywhere else in the world.
The difference in meaning is presumably simply a consequence of the fact that US politics is essentially liberal and therefore falls on the right on the political spectrum.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

Yes indeed, that's obvious. Also, if you have forgotten, for instance France has not hesitated to stand up against your government in the past.

We are talking about praise though. Specifically praise going to a praise worthy individual. While one may not agree with the extent of the praise it would not be very politik to argue the praise. It would be like having a person say "I have the most beautiful child in the world" and responding "Well its certainly cute but its no Adonis." It may have worked for Churchill, but... well he was Churchill.

 

[humanino]

We are talking about praise though.

If they were strongly opposed, silence would have been quite appropriate. Besides, one can (as Hans suggested) read between the lines

congratulations on this award and it is certainly an incentive for the American president - but also for us all - to help achieve this aim.

And Obama himself has made it straightforwardly clear what he himself thinks about his prize.

 

[Astronuc]

In all fairness to Obama, he had it thrust on him. I'm sure he didn't see it coming. So hopefully he lives up to expectations - and perhaps exceeds expectations in the global diplomatic arena.

The Nobel Peace Prize committee is another matter, as are the behaviors of other world leaders.

Here it is 2009 and we're repeating the same behavior that's been going on for - well since recorded history and before.

The world seems be trapped in a perpetual cycle of violence and aggression.


And what have you done lately to change that?

 

[WhoWee]

And what have you done lately to change that?

An interesting thing happened on the way home from my son's football game. My youngest daughter noticed a small dog rolling around in the busy street (dead animal on road) - then I noticed a little boy running towards the dog (crying). I stopped my vehicle (blocking traffic) and quickly removed both the boy and the dog from traffic. In spite of the situation, everyone in the cars/trucks I stopped appeared to be angry.

Then (of course) the boy's mother came running out and thought I was trying to do something bad to the boy (?). LUCKILY , someone explained my actions to the distraught mother.

As we drove away, my daughter commented that we should have just kept driving.

I wanted to be a smart arse, but instead I spent the next hour explaining why we would do it all again- that we did the right thing and that's what counts.

 

[WhoWee]

I've noticed something of a trend with awards. If you HAVE to make a choice - sometimes there aren't any deserving parties - other times you might have to choose between 2 excellent choices.

Maybe prestigious awards should only be given when deserved, not because of a date on a calendar?

 

[Evo]

Obama has done nothing so far to deserve this prize. It would appear that the commitee that made the decision decided to take it upon themselves to use the prize to goad Obama into taking certain actions. Ok, so put pressure on him. But what they didn't seem to think about was the negative affect that awarding him this prize would have on the people that he has to deal with. The Nobel committee has thrown a huge roadbloack before Obama in his dealings with the people that he needs to come to terms with in order achieve peace. Now they have yet another reason to dismiss him.

Obama should have rejected the award. He's done nothing to deserve it, and it can hurt critical negotiations going forward. I'm sure the award was a well meant, stupid, mistake.

 

[lisab]

I've noticed something of a trend with awards. If you HAVE to make a choice - sometimes there aren't any deserving parties - other times you might have to choose between 2 excellent choices.

Maybe prestigious awards should only be given when deserved, not because of a date on a calendar?

I agree, WhoWee. But is it really true that there is such a dearth of deserving candidates, the award can't be given every year?

How about Greg Mortenson? A guy who builds schools for girls...in Pakistan and Afghanistan. He has http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greg_Mortenson" , really exceptional. You might even say deserving.

 

[WhoWee]

Obama has done nothing so far to deserve this prize. It would appear that the commitee that made the decision decided to take it upon themselves to use the prize to goad Obama into taking certain actions. Ok, so put pressure on him. But what they didn't seem to think about was the negative affect that awarding him this prize would have on the people that he has to deal with. The Nobel committee has thrown a huge roadbloack before Obama in his dealings with the people that he needs to come to terms with in order achieve peace. Now they have yet another reason to dismiss him.

Obama should have rejected the award. He's done nothing to deserve it, and it can hurt critical negotiations going forward. I'm sure the award was a well meant, stupid, mistake.

I think Obama did the right thing in accepting the award and saying he hadn't yet earned it. They've put him in a very difficult position - a classic rock and a hard place.

Hopefully he'll be able to wave it around when negotiating with the "difficult states" and tell them the world expects them to work things out. (I'm a businessman - I look for the leverage in every deal)

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

If they were strongly opposed, silence would have been quite appropriate. Besides, one can (as Hans suggested) read between the lines

Note the rest of what I posted. I did not suggest that they were "strongly opposed" in which case I think the appropriate response would have been to say so.

And Obama himself has made it straightforwardly clear what he himself thinks about his prize.

Yes, he pretty much said that he does not deserve it but that he will accept it any way, though in a more politik fashion. Which is Russ's whole point, as far as I can tell, that these politicians are simply reacting (publicly) in the most polite and politically correct manner they can.

Considering what he said about Kanye in private I can only imagine what Obama may have said about the Peace Prize committee.

 

[arildno]

Obama has done nothing so far to deserve this prize. It would appear that the commitee that made the decision decided to take it upon themselves to use the prize to goad Obama into taking certain actions. Ok, so put pressure on him. But what they didn't seem to think about was the negative affect that awarding him this prize would have on the people that he has to deal with. The Nobel committee has thrown a huge roadbloack before Obama in his dealings with the people that he needs to come to terms with in order achieve peace. Now they have yet another reason to dismiss him.

Obama should have rejected the award. He's done nothing to deserve it, and it can hurt critical negotiations going forward. I'm sure the award was a well meant, stupid, mistake.

Already well over 30 years ago, a perceptive previous prime minister of Norway, Trygve Bratteli, characterized the young Jagland as "dangerous".

Because Bratteli thought him to be a well-meaning idiot with loads of ambition.

 

[Vanadium 50]

I agree, WhoWee. But is it really true that there is such a dearth of deserving candidates, the award can't be given every year?

The Nobel committee has skipped awarding the Peace Prize several times - for example, during WW1 and WW2, and most recently in 1972.

 

[arildno]

According to this list, http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/

the years in which the Peace Prize was not awarded were:

1914-16,1918, 1923, 1924, 1928, 1932, 1939-1943, 1948, 1955-56, 1966-67 and 1972.

 

[Astronuc]

How about Greg Mortenson? A guy who builds schools for girls...in Pakistan and Afghanistan. He has http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greg_Mortenson" , really exceptional. You might even say deserving.

Absolutely! So write to Obama or head of state in one's nation, and one's national legislature representative (e.g., Congress person, Senator, . . . ) and request that they nominate Greg Mortenson for the Nobel Peace Prize in 2010 (or until he receives the award) for his "humanitarian work and advocation of literacy in neglected areas of the world", specifically N. Pakistan and Afghanistan. His organization, Central Asia Institute, is also looking at project in Kyrgystan and Tajikistan. CAI sponsors schools and teachers to educate both boys and girls up to at least grade 5. The schools are built by the local people/community who have a vested interest in education and literacy of their children. In addition, CAI sponsors health centers/clinics and women's centers.

www.ikat.org - one can also donate here.
https://www.ikat.org/projects/cai-programs/
https://www.ikat.org/projects/regional-map/ - showing where programs are in place

Congresswoman Mary Bono Mack has been a long time supporter of Mortenson, and she and 4 other congresspersons publicly stated their nomination of Mortenson for the Nobel Peace Prize.

 

[arildno]

Another worthy candidate would have been Messaoud Boulkheir, who for 40 years has campaigned against ongoing slavery in Mauretania.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messaoud_Ould_Boulkheir

 

[Astronuc]

Another worthy candidate would have been Messaoud Boulkheir, who for 40 years has campaigned against ongoing slavery in Mauretania.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messaoud_Ould_Boulkheir

Certainly a much better choice than say Al Gore and IPCC.

There are many others who seem to go unnoticed.

 

[humanino]

 

[mheslep]

you can classify as right-wing:

NATO SECRETARY GENERAL ANDERS FOGH RASMUSSEN
FRENCH PRESIDENT NICOLAS SARKOZY
ANGELA MERKEL, GERMAN CHANCELLOR...

By EU standards maybe, not by US standards.

 

[humanino]

By EU standards maybe, not by US standards.

Yes, and the Nobel committee indeed acts by EU standards, not by US standards.

 

[Moonbear]

So basically Obama won the nobel peace prize simply because he isn't Bush?

That's what it seems like. A bowl of mashed potatoes might be equally qualified under those standards. And just having hope and ambition for world peace would mean every Miss America and Miss Universe contestant should win the Nobel Peace Prize too.

I agree with the sentiments that he should decline it. He may be doing a decent job as president, but that's all he's done so far, nothing extraordinary or special, and nothing that has brought peace to anyone anywhere. If he accomplishes any of his goals, they can award it later when it's been earned.