Friday, November 06, 2009

I'm Confused...

I've been trying to figure it out for quite some time now, and haven't been able to make any sense out of it...

Doesn't a person need to have actually *done* something (not just have potential, and not just utter words) to win the Nobel Peace Prize?

I've sincerely tried to be open minded about it, not wanting to allow a simple knee-jerk reaction, and have made a real attempt to understand just why the committee awarded President Obama the Peace Prize. I honestly think I simply must have misjudged the true meaning of that prize. Not because of who won it, as my friends on the "other side of the aisle" will no doubt accuse (please, no knee-jerking), but because of the overwhelming lack of real actions to have truly earned it. Let him actually *do* something, which takes more time than the committee even had to evaluate, and then judge on the sole basis of the actions done.

This prize should not be a tool to make some sort of political statement, or to award as an encouragement to follow through on words spoken, but a recognition of true and noble deeds already and actually accomplished. I do not see anything of that calibre happening at this point, and certainly not way back at the time the vote was taken for the Prize. Even staunch supporters of the President have to admit, beyond the high expectations they have for him, he has not yet done anything *that* noteworthy.

I am afraid this once esteemed honor will not be quite as high in my personal estimation in the future. By using the Peace Prize as a political statement, the committee has cheapened it in my eyes. It has lost all its former meaning for me.

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

Hi Carol --

I've heard Obama's Nobel prize equated to me be awarded the Heisman Trophy for sitting watching a football game in the Rose Bowl! Makes about as much sense. What it does is cheapen the value and meaning of the Nobel Prize.

Eric Chang

Ed Horton said...

It didn't surprise me. After all, this is the same committee that awarded the peace prize to Yassar Arafat - the most blood thirsty murderer of innocent women and children since Adolf Hitler. I normally don't even give notice to who is awarded any of the prises.

Dad

Karen said...

I understand exactly what you're saying and have had the same thoughts myself. I've tried to understand it, too, but those who started crowing about it when it was announced were displaying the same kind of knee-jerk reaction they accused of the critics. And my first thought when I heard the announcement was how much the Peace Prize lost its meaning for me. Wouldn't it be nice to live in a world where it's not all about the politics?

Karen said...

I understand exactly what you're saying and have had the same thoughts myself. I've tried to understand it, too, but those who started crowing about it when it was announced were displaying the same kind of knee-jerk reaction they accused of the critics. And my first thought when I heard the announcement was how much the Peace Prize lost its meaning for me. Wouldn't it be nice to live in a world where it's not all about the politics?

Fotografie Oude School said...

You have a very nice blog..... Compliments from the Netherlands....

But to answer your question: Even Barak Obama say's the noble peace price came to soon.... But Mr. Obama gave a lot of hope to many many people in the world, even here in the Netherlands. We are very glad the most important country in the world has a president who beleaves in people and in peace rather than in war and in money (like president Bush)!!
And sometimes giving people hope is enough for a peace price!