Saturday, October 13, 2007

The Nobel Peace Prize, a partisan award

Please join in the Valley of the Shadow Annual Fundraiser. We are raising $7,700. Please hit the Tip Jar here to contribute. Thank you.
------------------------------------------------
So, Vice President Albert Gore (and the Intergovernmental Committee on Climate Change) won the Nobel Peace Prize. First, congratulations to both. Now the crux of the problem:

According to Albert Nobel, creator of dynamite and founder of the Peace Prize:

"The whole of my remaining realizable estate shall be dealt with in the following way: the capital, invested in safe securities by my executors, shall constitute a fund, the interest on which shall be annually distributed in the form of prizes to those who, during the preceding year, shall have conferred the greatest benefit on mankind. The said interest shall be divided into five equal parts, which shall be apportioned as follows: one part to the person who shall have made the most important discovery or invention within the field of physics; one part to the person who shall have made the most important chemical discovery or improvement; one part to the person who shall have made the most important discovery within the domain of physiology or medicine; one part to the person who shall have produced in the field of literature the most outstanding work in an ideal direction; and one part to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses. The prizes for physics and chemistry shall be awarded by the Swedish Academy of Sciences; that for physiology or medical works by the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm; that for literature by the Academy in Stockholm, and that for champions of peace by a committee of five persons to be elected by the Norwegian Storting. It is my express wish that in awarding the prizes no consideration be given to the nationality of the candidates, but that the most worthy shall receive the prize, whether he be Scandinavian or not"

By those basic precepts, the prize should go to someone who has made people's lives more freer and peaceful. In the last two decades, the prize has gone to Anti-semites such as Yassir Arafat, Mohammed El-Baridi and the United Nations (famous for it's 1975 "Zionism is racism" and always voting against Israel save for the United States), Democratic partisans such as, (anti-Semite) Jimmy Carter and Albert Gore. Receiving the Nobel Peace prize does not change the sins, but it should not redeem the sinner. An Anti-Semite is still an Anti-Semite after they win the award.

By the way, how many wars and massacres have the United Nations stopped? The same amount as the League of Nations.

I could think of other, more deserving people, who should get the Peace Prize: How about the Burmese Monks? How about an Iranian dissident? or a Cuban one? Or a Palestinian organization which believes in non-violence?

The last Republican who was given the prize was Henry Kissinger; Does removing dictators and theocrats count as bringing peace and freedom? If the Nobel Prize is the guide, people can suffer under dictators or theocrats. Thanks Norwegians!

7 comments:

  1. Why don't they create a new Nobel prize for Environmental Science? I thought peace was about peace and not climate? How does the climate change panel bring about peace? Maybe I have too much stress in my life, but I don't understand what this has to do with "peace"

    ReplyDelete
  2. JSF, it's partisan? To which American political party do these foreigners belong?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Jason,

    It seems the Nobel committee seems to err on the side of the Democrats. Repeatedly.

    ReplyDelete
  4. A partisan is one who puts the good of their political party ahead of the good of the country. How can a foreign prize committee possibly be partisan, even if you feel that they've snubbed your side too many times? Whether environmentalists or republicans either deserve a prize for peace is a whole other topic for another time.

    ReplyDelete
  5. JSF, these little Norwegian gnomes admitted that they were merely making a political gesture. Gore's movie was full of holes (as the British judge pointed out to the educators of the U.K.).
    Clearly it wasn't for any academic or artistic achievement that Gore's pinch of fluff piece of trash was awarded this prize. Mr Nobel created the prize for those who work towards peace. It's been cheapened and is worth no more than a old Coke bottle cap.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Aurora, if it got your panties in a knot it can't be all bad!

    ReplyDelete
  7. The Peace Prize has been politicized since its inception.

    The awards given 1935, 1950, 1964, and 1973 aroused controversy when they were awarded.

    It cannot be doubted that there are any number of candidatesworthy of the honor, for example I would suuggest Robert Muller or Elizabeth Odio Benito.

    ReplyDelete

Welcome to the Valley! Please comment about the post and keep to the subject.

There is only one person (JSF) keeping track of comments, so as long as what you write is civil and close to the purpose of the post, you will see it.

Keep this in mind: Politics should not be Personal; then you have a place here.

Write! History will remember your words!

LinkWithin

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...