Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » Al Gore and the Noble Peace Prize (Page 1)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
Author Topic: Al Gore and the Noble Peace Prize
Lobo
Member
Member # 89

 - posted      Profile for Lobo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Why is a global warming activist nominated for the peace prize?

Do you think he will win?

Posts: 1094 | Registered: Oct 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Richard Dey
Member
Member # 1727

 - posted      Profile for Richard Dey   Email Richard Dey   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Nobel ... Nobel ... Isn't that the closet heterosexual who blew his brother up with dynamite?
Posts: 7866 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DonaldD
Member
Member # 1052

 - posted      Profile for DonaldD   Email DonaldD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You'll need to be a bit more specific than that, Richard.
Posts: 10751 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DonaldD
Member
Member # 1052

 - posted      Profile for DonaldD   Email DonaldD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
According to Alfred Nobel's will, the prize for peace should be awarded "to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between the nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses".

Sounds more like a description of Michael Moore than of Gore... [Wink]

Though arguably, Gore might be there for his work to bring nations together to fight global warming. Not saying he would likely win, mind you

[ October 11, 2007, 01:29 PM: Message edited by: DonaldD ]

Posts: 10751 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lobo
Member
Member # 89

 - posted      Profile for Lobo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Oops, sorry about the spelling... Nobel not Noble...

I think everyone is a closet gay to Richard... except the ones who have already come out.

Posts: 1094 | Registered: Oct 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wayward Son
Member
Member # 210

 - posted      Profile for Wayward Son   Email Wayward Son   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I understand that almost everyone and his uncle is nominated for a Nobel Prize, especially for Peace. (Anyone want to lay odds on President Bush being nominated, too? [Smile] ) So being nominated ain't all that surprising.

I very much doubt he will win. Not until the Artic ices melt a bit more, a few more Class 5 hurricanes hit the U.S., and a major drought hits the Midwest.

Posts: 8681 | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Richard Dey
Member
Member # 1727

 - posted      Profile for Richard Dey   Email Richard Dey   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Closet heterosexual, Lobo, not homosexual. Actually, it was the public who concluded that Nobel was gay -- not gay men themselves. He liked the company of men, shunned women, and never married; not a good ruler.

Homophilicists have very high standards, y'know. It was Swedish homophophiles who discovered that he had paid women friends; he just liked to touch, not have sex. He was ultimately denied gay status in 1967.

His brother Emil, I remember, was blown up fixing nitroglycerine -- I think at the time of our Civil War. Supposedly, that's why he went off hunting for a safe alternative.

Safe dynamite. It think that's something like cigarette filters, safety catches on guns and safe nuclear fusion.

Anyway, I would give Gore the Fatto of the Year Prize, but maybe a red star for blowing hot air on global warming -- and he didn't invent the internet either! You don't invent something just by voting tax dollars to research something the Pentagon was already promoting.

Posts: 7866 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
NSCutler
Member
Member # 1403

 - posted      Profile for NSCutler   Email NSCutler   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Nominees for the Nobel are never formally announced and nomination records are sealed for 50 years. It isn't like the Oscars. Being nominated means next to nothing.
Posts: 789 | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DonaldD
Member
Member # 1052

 - posted      Profile for DonaldD   Email DonaldD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You mean safe nuclear fission certainly, Richard?
Posts: 10751 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lobo
Member
Member # 89

 - posted      Profile for Lobo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by NSCutler:
Being nominated means next to nothing.

Well that goes well with his NOT winning an oscar, and being handed en Emmy in a non-competitive, made up for him, category. Why do Hollywood and the media love the man so much?
Posts: 1094 | Registered: Oct 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
KonerAtHome
Member
Member # 2168

 - posted      Profile for KonerAtHome   Email KonerAtHome       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
One of these days Richard is going to claim that Adam was gay and that Eve was really impregnated by the snake.
Posts: 461 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
NSCutler
Member
Member # 1403

 - posted      Profile for NSCutler   Email NSCutler   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
If Adam was really straight he would have been happy with Lilith and Eve would never enter the picture. [Smile]
Posts: 789 | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Richard Dey
Member
Member # 1727

 - posted      Profile for Richard Dey   Email Richard Dey   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The snake in the pocket, maybe [Big Grin] ! But everybody knows that Jewish myth is not anywhere near my field of interests!

Fission, fusion, fustian! That's why they won't let me drive the reactor, DD! Did anything ever come of it btw??

Lobo's point about the mediums' loving Gore is why he became a nominee for anything. He had tons of money, and was good with the press. What program did he actually have?

Anyway, there have been some real losers who've received Nobels in the nonscientific world. They've all reflected Scandanavia's wishy-washy marriages btw public and private sectors that do well so long as there are any gung-ho capitalist countries willing to buy their products. It's a small world, if not provincial; do they add up to 20,000,000 altogether?

Moreover, I think they drink too much.

Posts: 7866 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jesse
Member
Member # 1860

 - posted      Profile for Jesse   Email Jesse   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Well, it's interesting that Gore never claimed to have invented the internet.
Posts: 11410 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"One of these days Richard is going to claim that Adam was gay and that Eve was really impregnated by the snake."

Putting aside the gay part, the rest is kind of in line with the Garden myth.

Gore did too invent the internet. Metaphysically speaking, that is.

Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
bombasto
Member
Member # 5217

 - posted      Profile for bombasto   Email bombasto   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I applaud the nomination of Mr. Gore to the same august body that includes the likes of YASSER ARAFAT. May he also be nominated for the Flying Fickle Finger of Fate award. Some of you may have to Google that one.
Posts: 74 | Registered: Sep 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DonaldD
Member
Member # 1052

 - posted      Profile for DonaldD   Email DonaldD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
As well as such luminaries as Muhammad Yunus, Médecins Sans Frontières, Aung San Suu Kyi, Lech Walesa and (heh heh) Jimmy Carter [Razz]
Posts: 10751 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mynnion
Member
Member # 5287

 - posted      Profile for Mynnion   Email Mynnion   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
He won it in a shared award. It seems to me that even if every bit of data he presented was 100% accurate (different argument) that the award would be presented to the top scientist(s) in the field. The reseach isn't his just the presentation.
Posts: 1271 | Registered: Sep 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Straygaldwyr
Member
Member # 4465

 - posted      Profile for Straygaldwyr   Email Straygaldwyr       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
He has made it cool to be afraid of God again! Only he wants us to fear the wrath of Gaia! (God Light) He should use the notoriety of the win to run for election again and all the bad things that have happened since it was stolen from him will be undone! Draft Gore! Draft Gore...!

(and stop Hillary)

Posts: 1520 | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Straygaldwyr
Member
Member # 4465

 - posted      Profile for Straygaldwyr   Email Straygaldwyr       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Also since Stockholm seems to like the UN so much it is time that it moved there so the likes of Chavez and Amajenedan are kept off our hallowed soil...
Posts: 1520 | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DonaldD
Member
Member # 1052

 - posted      Profile for DonaldD   Email DonaldD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Lobo, why do you say that Gore's documentary did not win an academy award?
Posts: 10751 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rallan
Member
Member # 1936

 - posted      Profile for Rallan   Email Rallan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by kenmeer livermaile:
"One of these days Richard is going to claim that Adam was gay and that Eve was really impregnated by the snake."

Now why would he do that when he can just be lazy and borrow a gay Eden meme that already exists? Adam and Eve were straight as an arrow, but Adam's (apocryphal) first wife Lilith was a free-spirited, independent rug-muncher.
Posts: 2570 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Adam Masterman
Member
Member # 1142

 - posted      Profile for Adam Masterman   Email Adam Masterman   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
I applaud the nomination of Mr. Gore to the same august body that includes the likes of YASSER ARAFAT.
With all due respect, this is the most retarded right wing talking point in history. Take five minutes and look at the list of peace prize winners. Pretty much every time a major conflict is resolved, the Nobel comittee gives a prize to the architects of the resolution. Its not about declaring Arafat (or Henry Kissinger, or Anwar Sadat) to be lifelong icons of peace; its about acknowledging and celebrating actions which lead to peace, or could lead to peace.

Sour grapes over the prize going to a democrat is one thing. Misrepresenting the purpose and intent of the prize over those sour grapes is either ignorant or dishonest.

Adam

Posts: 4823 | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TaoJeannes
Member
Member # 1490

 - posted      Profile for TaoJeannes   Email TaoJeannes       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Yep, he won:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071012/ap_on_sc/nobel_peace

It's official. The Nobel Prize is now as biased and irrelevant as the Oscars and the Emmys.

Posts: 279 | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
msquared
Member
Member # 113

 - posted      Profile for msquared   Email msquared   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You know I have no problem with Carter and Arafat and Begin getting the award. History has shown that it did not work, for what ever reasons, but they were trying to solve a problem that may not have a solution.

But for the life of me, I do not understand how Gore's actions justify the Peace Prize? How has it promoted peace? If anything it has promoted conflict.

I am not saying he is wrong, or right. My position on this is independent of my position on his crusade. I just don't see how this qualifies.

msquared

Posts: 4002 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lobo
Member
Member # 89

 - posted      Profile for Lobo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by DonaldD:
Lobo, why do you say that Gore's documentary did not win an academy award?

I am saying htat Al Gore did not win the award. I can't tell you how many times I have seen in major news sources the statement that Al Gore has won an Oscar.
Posts: 1094 | Registered: Oct 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Adam Masterman
Member
Member # 1142

 - posted      Profile for Adam Masterman   Email Adam Masterman   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I wouldn't have picked Gore. It seems outside of the intent of the award.

Adam

Posts: 4823 | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Redskullvw
Member
Member # 188

 - posted      Profile for Redskullvw   Email Redskullvw   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I am absolutely stunned that he won this award. Its not that he isn't a nice person, or that he isn't a good advocate for what he believes in but how many other people have there been that have taken an issue not related to working for global peace and won the Peace Prize?

I mean wouldn't i have been more fitting for Bono to win the prize compared to Gore? Afterall Bono has made a multitude of problems in Africa, like pest borne disease, medical access, developmental funding, and political reform not only a global issue but he also put his money where his mouth is and actually attempted to solve problems that daily impact millions of people.

What has Gore done? He made a movie that was politically biased, uneven in factual representation, and simply plays to guilty feelings of Americans that they are the cause for all climate change. Essentially, Gore just won the prize for telling America that its society and economic activities are the fundamental cause for climate change and that unless we become subsistence level consumers the rest of the world is going to heat up like an oven and drown us in polar melt water.

Has anything he did resulted in Peace?

I'd say no it he hasn't- but I don't think that was the intent of his movie project either.

The only thing I can think of is that since there isn't any leader in the Islamic world even attempting to solve any of the Islamic wars, and since no one finds the Pope's calls for peace and his attempts to get Islamic leaders involved in peaceful resolution of problems, the posibility of awarding it to any religious leader was lost. The fact that the political leaders in the west are largely involved in either the Afghanistan or Iraq theaters of the current war pretty much excludes them as well. That leaves essentially no one but Russia and China as possible sources of leaders working for global peace.

I guess it was a year of no one being qualified at all so he got the nod.

I still can't figure out how exactly one film results in his getting the prize, especially since it isn't a very good documentary in the first place.

I think his one is going to be looked upon years from now as a silly award.

Posts: 6333 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Adam Masterman
Member
Member # 1142

 - posted      Profile for Adam Masterman   Email Adam Masterman   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:

The only thing I can think of is that since there isn't any leader in the Islamic world even attempting to solve any of the Islamic wars, and since no one finds the Pope's calls for peace and his attempts to get Islamic leaders involved in peaceful resolution of problems, the posibility of awarding it to any religious leader was lost.

Because Christianity and Islam are the world's only two religions? You know, there are thousands of Buddhist monks in Myanmar risking their lives to demonstrate for democracy right now.

Adam

Posts: 4823 | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
msquared
Member
Member # 113

 - posted      Profile for msquared   Email msquared   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Adam

And I think they should get the Peace Prize next year.

I think Red was talking about the time frame for when the award is considered. Those Monks just had lousy timing. [Smile]

I admire those guys. I fear for them as well.

msquared

Posts: 4002 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Redskullvw
Member
Member # 188

 - posted      Profile for Redskullvw   Email Redskullvw   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Adam

Mark hit my point for me.

I was just pointing out the fact that Islam is currently wrapped up in the majority of conflicts in the world, Christianity also has a few religious based conflicts as well. Meaning that either camp could be ripe for someone to point out the obvious that peace is better than war and should be worked for.

Its not my fault that the Buddhist people's of the world are already peaceful.

I mean frankly the Dali Lama would be a far better choice considering his decades of trying to free his people peacefully.

But then again you have to deal with the whole issue that his leadership concerns a people far away on the roof of the world. He doesn't appear at too many film festivals in Hollywood.

Maybe the Buddhists need better lobbyists.

Posts: 6333 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
WeAreAllJust LooseChange
Member
Member # 3411

 - posted      Profile for WeAreAllJust LooseChange         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
A transcript of this morning's Democracy Now program (www.democracynow.org), which is close to my own opinion on the subject.

To answer directly the question from Lobo - why should Al Gore be nominated (and in this case shared) the Nobel peace prize, when he is a global warming activist:

- Global warming is the direct reason for the start of climate related wars in Africa.
- Global Warming will escalate the displacement of very large groups of people, who will become refugees in areas they do not consider their home. The result will be more conflicts, gorilla movements if not outright wars in those areas.
- Global Warming has escalated the fight for securing access to natural resources, water more specifically – again – directly leading to conflicts.
Bringing to the attention of the masses and advocating for world-wide recognition of the fact of Global warming and its consequences are the primary reasons why I do support that Al Gore deserves part of the Nobel Peace prize this year.
Looking from another angle though, his past standing on conflicts and US involvement in them has been such of a typical politician – wait and see and when the game is clear to go in a certain way - then form an opinion.
In such respect he does not deserve the Nobel Peace prize award in general. Only when you put his actions in time’s perspective one can argue that he does deserve such recognition for this specific year, more than other activists.

---
AMY GOODMAN: We begin with this morning's announcement of the 2007 winner of the Nobel Peace Prize. Jan Egeland of the Norwegian Nobel Committee.

JAN EGELAND: The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2007 is to be shared in two equal parts between the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC, and Albert Arnold “Al” Gore, Jr., for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about manmade climate change and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change.

AMY GOODMAN: The UN’s climate panel groups 2,500 researchers from more than 130 nations and issued reports this year blaming human activities for climate changes ranging from more heat waves to floods. Since Al Gore’s failed bid for the presidency in 2000, he’s emerged as a leading climate campaigner. He won an Academy Award for his 2006 film An Inconvenient Truth.

George Monbiot is a widely read columnist for the Guardian of London, a leading British campaigner for the environment. His latest book is called Heat: How to Stop the Planet from Burning. He joins us now from Britain.

George Monbiot, your response to the Nobel Peace Prize winners this year today?

GEORGE MONBIOT: Well, I am delighted, particularly for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. This must be the most maligned institution on earth, in that it’s a very conservative scientific panel which chooses only the science which is rock-solid, and yet it’s often portrayed as an insane radical organization trying to overthrow civilization as we know it. And it’s fought a long, hard battle for the science to be heard, and that battle is now being rewarded.

JUAN GONZALEZ: And, George Monbiot, in announcing the award, the Nobel Prize committee indicated that it was seeking to actively make clear the importance and the dangers of continued global warming. Your response to their message?

GEORGE MONBIOT: Well, they have done so, but they have done so by drawing only on the science which can be absolutely trusted. In other words, the science which ends up in their reports is the science of consensus, and they exclude things even which have a very widespread scientific backing; but where there’s some legitimate dispute, they will exclude that from their reports. So this is an organization which has been as rigorous as you possibly can be in documenting what is happening to the world's climate. And yet they are constantly pilloried and attacked by rightwing climate change deniers as if they're doing the opposite. And I am very, very glad that they have been recognized in this way.

AMY GOODMAN: And, George Monbiot, the significance of Al Gore winning the Nobel Peace Prize, his record after he was vice president and his record as part of the Clinton administration?

GEORGE MONBIOT: Well, I have to say that I feel slightly more equivocal about this, because while I think he’s done some very good work indeed in publicizing climate change, his record on peace has not been quite so good. And this is, after all, the Nobel Peace Prize. And in common, unfortunately, with most of the Democratic Party, he has been quick to endorse and slow to condemn unwarranted attacks on other nations, and therefore I do feel uneasy about his receipt of the prize.

Posts: 174 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Colin JM0397
Member
Member # 916

 - posted      Profile for Colin JM0397   Email Colin JM0397   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Maybe it should be like the Oscars? Those who are on the front end are forgotten, while those who want to be in the running release in the few months leading up to the voting.

Maybe those monks can settle down for 6 months and then get things stirred up again next summer?

---------------------

On another note, how is it the IPCC gets the co-award? Is this proof what they are promoting isn't science? Why not promote the IPCC in the science awards? (that's rhetorical, I know why not).

Posts: 4738 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wayward Son
Member
Member # 210

 - posted      Profile for Wayward Son   Email Wayward Son   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Because there is no Nobel Prize for Meterology.

(That was the answer you were thinking of, wasn't it?) [Smile]

Posts: 8681 | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Adam Masterman
Member
Member # 1142

 - posted      Profile for Adam Masterman   Email Adam Masterman   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:

I mean frankly the Dali Lama would be a far better choice considering his decades of trying to free his people peacefully.

[Smile]

He did win, in 1989. I actually saw his Nobel prize when I met him, back in 98.

I was responding more to the (offtopic) sense of "religion" as meaning "western religion", which I find extremely irksome (not suprisingly). My single most hated turn of phrase: "the three major religions." (guess why)

The Burmese monks aren't candidates for this year; that was just the first thing to cross my mind. There are engaged Buddhists working for peace all over the world; Zen Peacemakers, Fleet Maul, Thich Nhat Hahn. I don't think its necessary to write off religion just because the current Pope isn't doing much.

Adam

Posts: 4823 | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
hobsen
Member
Member # 2923

 - posted      Profile for hobsen   Email hobsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
When Al Gore was a U.S. Senator, he wrote Earth in the Balance: Ecology and the Human Spirit, a work calling for vigorous government efforts to prevent various impending ecological disasters. While sales of the work were undoubtedly stimulated by the fact he was a candidate for Vice President at the time it was published, the work reflects a commitment to addressing such issues that predates his service as Vice President.

So the IPCC probably is more deserving of the honor than Al Gore, assuming the work of either is considered sufficiently related to world peace. However Gore has done various things to raise public awareness of these issues, so he has some claim to the prize. Considering the long list of unknowns awarded such prizes, and the equally long list of the deserving who were never so honored, this is far from the worst choice ever made in this category. On the other hand, I do not see it as elevating the stature of the Nobel awards very much either, as has been done by the obviously deserving so honored. I doubt many future recipients will say they are thrilled to receive the same award as Al Gore.

Posts: 4387 | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Greg Davidson
Member
Member # 3377

 - posted      Profile for Greg Davidson   Email Greg Davidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
WeAreAllJustLooseChange is right on for all the right reasons. In the next 50 years I predict a very large number of lives are on the line based on how well the world responds to the effects of climate change. The may be some errors in prediction (the severity could be lesser or greater than predicted), but if it has the nominal impact, if can be the major threat to peace in the 21st century. And when I say "large", I mean numbers on the order of a hundred million violent deaths, or about the same number who were killed in all the ward of the 20th century.
Posts: 4178 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
talon
Member
Member # 1068

 - posted      Profile for talon     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
2 questions that I see:
The first is whether global climate change represents an actual and substantial threat to human well-being and piece. This question has been exhaustively answered (though perfidiously confounded).
So the only relevant question is the second, which is whether the mere promotion of concern is legitimate grounds for a Nobel.
Now, as I see it, the better move would be to wait and see if Gore's actions prove to have practical relevance to the unfolding of events. However, I would imagine that the Nobel committee is thinking from an activist's standpoint, and itself is trying to raise awareness about global climate change as an issue.

Therefore, I do not think that the move was appropriate, but I do think that it was entirely laudable, because this issue, as far as I'm concerned, needs to be tackled with extraordinary measures, as it represents the first time in our history that we might f**k up in a way that might continue to affect the quality of life for countless generations of our descendants.

Posts: 158 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mariner
Member
Member # 1618

 - posted      Profile for Mariner   Email Mariner       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
By what criteria is the Nobel Peace Prize given? After all, it has, at various times, been given to:

1) Groups negotiating for peace who may not have done so under good faith conditions (Arafat, Le Duc Tho)

2) Groups negotiating for peace for their own country's benefit rather than a higher moral (Kissinger)

3) People raising awareness of an issue in a matter that exaggerates or falsifies the truth (Al, Rigoberta Menchú)

4) People who may have been promoting peace in one aspect but were aspousing hatred and racism in another (Wangari Maathai, Nicholas Butler)

5) People that tried to do something good, but failed miserably (Mohamed ElBaradei)

6) Groups faced with massive corruption (Kofi and the UN)

7) The League of Nations, not once but three times in the 30s...

What's the criteria? Is it the results that matter, regardless of the reasons behind it? That would explain some of the above, but would eliminate others. Or is it the thought that counts, even if you don't actually succeed in anything? Is it ok to be a completely hate filled violent person as long as you're peaceful in one regard? Is it ok to support failed practices as long as they look good on paper? Is it ok to support institutions that may look good now but we eventually find out are completely screwed up and ineffective? Is it ok to support something because you want to be an activist in that field?

Obviously several worthy people have won the prize as well, but I hardly think this will destroy the reputation of the Peace Prize. It seems to me the prize has always been fairly inconsistent in what it stands for. (Although I have to admit, it does seem like quite a few of the recent awards can be seen as having been given for political or ideological reasons, whether that's actually true or not).

By the way, I like the Wall Street Journa's editorial on the subject:

quote:
In Olso Friday, the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize was not awarded to the Burmese monks whose defiance against, and brutalization at the hands of, the country's military junta in recent weeks captured the attention of the Free World.

The prize was also not awarded to Morgan Tsvangirai, Arthur Mutambara and other Zimbabwe opposition leaders who were arrested and in some cases beaten by police earlier this year while protesting peacefully against dictator Robert Mugabe.

Or to Father Nguyen Van Ly, a Catholic priest in Vietnam arrested this year and sentenced to eight years in prison for helping the pro-democracy group Block 8406.

Or to Wajeha al-Huwaider and Fawzia al-Uyyouni, co-founders of the League of Demanders of Women's Right to Drive Cars in Saudi Arabia, who are waging a modest struggle with grand ambitions to secure basic rights for women in that Muslim country.

Or to Colombian President Àlvaro Uribe, who has fought tirelessly to end the violence wrought by left-wing terrorists and drug lords in his country.

Or to Garry Kasparov and the several hundred Russians who were arrested in April, and are continually harassed, for resisting President Vladimir Putin's slide toward authoritarian rule.

Or to the people of Iraq, who bravely work to rebuild and reunite their country amid constant threats to themselves and their families from terrorists who deliberately target civilians.

Or to Presidents Viktor Yushchenko and Mikheil Saakashvili who, despite the efforts of the Kremlin to undermine their young states, stayed true to the spirit of the peaceful "color" revolutions they led in Ukraine and Georgia and showed that democracy can put down deep roots in Russia's backyard.

Or to Britain's Tony Blair, Ireland's Bertie Ahern and the voters of Northern Ireland, who in March were able to set aside decades of hatred to establish joint Catholic-Protestant rule in Northern Ireland.

Or to thousands of Chinese bloggers who run the risk of arrest by trying to bring uncensored information to their countrymen.

Or to scholar and activist Saad Eddin Ibrahim, jailed presidential candidate Ayman Nour and other democracy campaigners in Egypt.

Or, posthumously, to lawmakers Walid Eido, Pierre Gemayel, Antoine Ghanem, Rafik Hariri, George Hawi and Gibran Tueni; journalist Samir Kassir; and other Lebanese citizens who've been assassinated since 2005 for their efforts to free their country from Syrian control.

Or to the Reverend Phillip Buck; Pastor Chun Ki Won and his organization, Durihana; Tim Peters and his Helping Hands Korea; and Liberty in North Korea, who help North Korean refugees escape to safety in free nations.

These men and women put their own lives and livelihoods at risk by working to rid the world of violence and oppression. Let us hope they survive the coming year so that the Nobel Prize Committee might consider them for the 2008 award.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110010732

I don't know, maybe the idea of one award is kinda dumb in the first place. Maybe we should be doing more to honor ALL people who work toward peace rather than just one who, more often than not, is already in the spotlight anyway.

Posts: 538 | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DonaldD
Member
Member # 1052

 - posted      Profile for DonaldD   Email DonaldD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I suppose the Wall Street Journal might also have included an entry such as the following:

"Or to the thousands of scientists worldwide who are working to better understand a phenomenon that may literally wipe out hundreds of millions of people and possibly displace a billion others."

The 'right' of several thousand of the richest people in the world to drive cars seems somehow trivial in the face of hundreds of millions of the poorest people in the world being killed.

Posts: 10751 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1