nobel peace prize

noble peace prize

list of laureates: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nobel_Peace_Prize_laureates

Foreign Policy has listed Mahatma Gandhi, Eleanor Roosevelt, Václav Havel, Ken Saro-Wiwa, Sir Fazle Hasan Abed, Sari Nusseibeh, and Corazon Aquino as people who “never won the prize, but should have”.

for more on nobel peace prize:

wikipedia small

The Nobel Peace Prize (Norwegian and Swedish: Nobels fredspris) is one of the five Nobel Prizes created by the Swedish industrialist, inventor, and armaments manufacturer Alfred Nobel, along with the prizes in Chemistry, Physics,Physiology or Medicine, and Literature. Since 1901, it has been awarded annually (with some exceptions) to those who 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.”

Per Alfred Nobel’s will, the recipient is selected by the Norwegian Nobel Committee, a 5-member committee appointed by the Parliament of Norway. Since 1990, the prize is awarded on December 10 in Oslo City Hall each year. The prize was formerly awarded in the Atrium of the University of Oslo Faculty of Law (1947–89), the Norwegian Nobel Institute (1905–46) and the Parliament (1901–04).

Due to its political nature, the Nobel Peace Prize has, for most of its history, been the subject of controversies.

_________________________

on Malala by Zeynep and Max Fisher:

malala and noble prize

It would have reaffirmed that too-common Western habit that, by giving a powerful symbol a greater platform and lots of accolades, we’ll have fulfilled our duty. 

The point of the Nobel Peace Prize is not to make Western TV viewers feel inspired and comforted, it is to promote peace. 

Still, as University of North Carolina assistant professor Zeynep Tufekci wrote in a careful and thoughtful piece on the Nobel decision, Malala “is but one courageous person.” Tufekci continues:

Fortunately for the world, there is no shortage of such brave, courageous individuals. In fact, there is an abundance of them, especially in poor, authoritarian countries. If you think Malala is rare, that is probably because you have not spent much time in such countries. Most Malalas, however, go nameless, and are not made into Western celebrities.

Tufecki also explains why she was uncomfortable with Jon Stewart’s declaration that he wanted to adopt Malala: It was “a striking sentiment in which our multi-decade involvement in Pakistan is reduced to finding a young woman we admire that we all want to take home as if to put on a shelf to adore.” We’ve already adopted her, in a metaphorical sense, and in so doing have asked her to implicitly absolve us of any further responsibility.

____________

great insight and fitting to jack et al ness..

____________

nobel prize winners

______

Pakistani teen, Indian activist win Nobel Peace Prize

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/10/10/us-nobel-prize-peace-idUSKCN0HZ0O120141010

________

Richard Feynman..

i don’t like honors (npp et al)… i notice others use my work… i don’t need anything else…
i’ve already got the prize:

1) the pleasure of finding things out

2) the kick in the discovery

3) the observation others use it

________

2016

colombian president for efforts to end 52 yrs of war

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/10/nobel-peace-prize-2016-colombia-santos-named-winner-161007050458104.html

Greek islanders stoic about Peace Prize nomination – Greeks who have saved numerous refugees say a Nobel Peace Prize win won’t change the fate of people fleeing war.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/10/greek-islanders-stoic-peace-prize-nomination-161006183722522.html

__________

@brainpicker

“Scientists do not devote their lives to the sometimes lonely…toilsome investigation of an austere universe because they want a prize.” THIS

@JannaLevin

My commentary on this weeks big news. Via @NPR: On Waiting For A Nobel Prize Announcement n.pr/2dIHwQC

_________

Dylan

_________

Salon (@Salon) tweeted at 5:35 AM – 13 Oct 2016 :

The explosive, deadly history of the Nobel Peace Prize https://t.co/LnN7HgOeuM (http://twitter.com/Salon/status/786530689621565440?s=17)

____________

from osho

http://thepowerofideas.ideapod.com/mother-teresa-deceiver-charlatan-hypocrite-according-osho/

Now, I have criticized her and said that the Nobel Prize should not have been given to her, and she feels offended by it. She says in her letter, “Reference: the Nobel Prize.”

This man Nobel was one of the greatest criminals possible in the world. The First World War was fought with his weapons; he was the greatest manufacturer of weapons, he accumulated so much money out of the First World War. Millions of people died — he was the manufacturer of death. He earned so much money that now the Nobel Prize is being distributed only from the interest on Nobel’s money… and each year dozens of Nobel Prizes are being given. How much money did this man leave? And from where did that money come? You cannot find any money more full of blood than the money that one gets from a Nobel Prize.

And now this Nobel Prize money has gone to the Missionaries of Charity. It comes from war, it comes from blood, it comes from murder and death. And now it serves a few hundred orphans, feeds seven thousand people — kills millions and feeds seven thousand people, raises a few orphans and makes millions of orphans! This is a strange world. What kind of arithmetic is this? First make millions of orphans and then choose a few hundred and give them to the Missionaries of Charity!

Mother Teresa could not refuse the Nobel Prize… a desire to be admired, a desire to be respectable in the world. And the Nobel Prize brings you the greatest respect. She accepted the prize.

Jean-Paul Sartre seems to be far more religious than Mother Teresa… because he refused that prize, he refused that money, he refused that respectability, for the simple reason that it comes from a wrong source – one thing. Secondly, he said [by implication], “I cannot accept any respectability from this insane society. To accept any respectability from this insane society means respecting the insanity of humanity.”

__________

Jean-Paul Sartre

Maria Popova (@brainpicker) tweeted at 6:01 AM – 22 Oct 2017 :

This is the moral courage of conviction: On this day in 1964, Sartre became the first person to decline the Nobel https://t.co/YUeY0blJf6https://t.co/njPqq64M5F (http://twitter.com/brainpicker/status/922070303420887040?s=17)

Despite its surprisingly dark origin, the Nobel Prize is regarded as the highest honor bestowed upon a human being

In 1964, he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature and became the first person to decline it. (The only other one to date is Lê Ðúc Tho, awarded the 1973 Peace Prize for his role in the Paris Peace Accords seeking to establish peace in Vietnam; he turned it down on the grounds that there was no actual peace in Vietnam — an admirable stance that calls to mind Marie Curie’s famous assertion that “one never notices what has been done; one can only see what remains to be done.”)

A writer who adopts political, social, or literary positions must act only with the means that are his own — that is, the written word. All the honors he may receive expose his readers to a pressure I do not consider desirable. If I sign myself Jean-Paul Sartre it is not the same thing as if I sign myself Jean-Paul Sartre, Nobel Prizewinner.

But in this short excerpt from BBC’s philosophy documentary Human, All Too Human, Sartre offers a far less politically correct explanation..

Because I was politically involved, the bourgeois establishment wanted to cover up my “past errors.” Now, there’s an admission! And so they gave me the Nobel Prize. They “pardoned” me and said I deserved it. It was monstrous!

physicist Richard Feynman — who won the Nobel Prize himself a year after Sartre — put it best in his eloquent denouncement of awards:

I don’t see that it makes any point that someone in the Swedish academy just decides that this work is noble enough to receive a prize — I’ve already gotten the prize. The prize is the pleasure of finding a thing out, the kick in the discovery, the observation that other people use it — those are the real things. The honors are unreal to me. I don’t believe in honors.

Making a fuss out of declining an award seems not much different from making a fuss over accepting it — both make the award more real than it need be if one were truly interested in breaking free from the system. Why can’t the private pleasure of finding things out be enough, award or no award?

award ness messes w us..

_________

CJ Werleman (@cjwerleman) tweeted at 11:14 AM – 2 Sep 2017 :

Rohingya Muslims fleeing Myanmar by boat as their homes are set ablaze by a Nobel Peace Prize recipient’s regime. https://t.co/gJSOJT1LRv (http://twitter.com/cjwerleman/status/904029792655228929?s=17)

__________

from Jason Hickel here (at 18 min):

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_lgCLmvRQo]

Yunis peace prize is important point..

they give nobel peace prizes to people who do not ultimately threaten the status quo of existing arrangements of economic and political power.

others get assassinated.. Yunis gets a peace prize because he validates our sense of being able to save the world as rich countries/individuals.. to save the world from poverty w/o any threat to our own privilege..for keeping their own status in the liberal econ.. and that’s fundamentally a problem i think

not saying Yunis is a bad person at all..

goes w Malala.. we acknowledge her for keeping our Education ness in tact..

__________

Advertisements