Warning: I'm a Liberal

[chasingtides]

So Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize.

I'm actually going to stand here and say: bravo. I think it's a good thing. As Obama said in his speech this morning, this is given as a great form of motivation, not as a reward for things done. (And damn, if his speech didn't put a smile on my face.) I think it's wonderful that we have a leader who is recognised, on an international level, as a bringer-of-peace or a potential bringer-of-peace rather than as a war-monger.

It's clear by my flist that (most?) don't agree with me. Obama is ruing America. The Nobel Peace Prize Committee has an agenda. Obama is a no good loser and now you're going to call me a racist because you're part of his cult.

First of all - the Nobel Peace Prize is not about America. Shocking, I know, but true. 'The Peace Prize is to go to whoever "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".' It's an international prize (in case you missed it - Oslo is not in the US) and it's about international doings. (Also, if you missed the memo, Norway is a constitutional monarchy and they've got socialised medicine to drool over. If you're bitching about Obama's health care reform as a point in why he shouldn't have won, Norway will laugh at you.)

Second of all - duh. Everyone has an agenda. I admit, the people complaining that the Nobel Peace Prize has an agenda sound a lot like the people I see whining about the Homosexual Agenda and Feminist Agenda. (And really, can't we all get together and just put our agenda's together? It's sort of tiring to have to figure out if today's meeting is on the World Peace Agenda, Gay Agenda, Bisexual Agenda, Liberal Agenda, Socialist Agenda, or Feminist Agenda.) But, uh, how could a committee dedicated to giving awards and money for people working towards world peace not have an overarching agenda? (How can any politically motivated entity not have an agenda? I want to know.)

Thirdly - You're an ass. No, really, I swear to gods that you are. I invite you to enter any liberal political forum. Wander on over to ontd_political if you want some conservatives to make you feel comfortable. People who like Obama criticise him all the damned time. People who don't like Obama criticise him all the damned time. And, shockingly, when the criticisms are rational, thought-out, based in reality, and don't involve racial slurs or the Birther Movement, we don't run around calling each other racist. Saying, "I can't criticism Obama or you'll call me racist," is more racist than that - because it a) suggests that Obama is nothing more than black (and reinforces the idea that one drop of non-Caucasion blood successfully Others someone) and b) suggests that being "black" is the only successful thing that Obama has done (and, you know, suggests that his supporters are a bunch of idiots who only shout things about the color of his skin).

The Nobel Peace Prize for 2009

The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Committee has attached special importance to Obama's vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.

Obama has as President created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations. Thanks to Obama's initiative, the USA is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened.

Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future. His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population.

For 108 years, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has sought to stimulate precisely that international policy and those attitudes for which Obama is now the world's leading spokesman. The Committee endorses Obama's appeal that "Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges."

Oslo, October 9, 2009

Comments

[sgrio.livejournal.com]

Holy fuck, that's awesome! You, too! :D

[chasingtides.livejournal.com]

If you want more: The Nobel Institute explains why they chose Obama.

[virginia-fell.livejournal.com]

This was the first I read about this, and I'm glad that you're the one who posted it. Excellent rant.

[chasingtides.livejournal.com]

Really, I can't count how many people I've seen talking about the Nobel agenda. First, I hate how in the parlance of US politics "agenda" has become a dirty word. We all have agendas! My agenda, at the moment, is to find something tasty for lunch and that only threatens my cupboards.

But really, obviously the Nobel Institute has an agenda. For world peace. Seriously, if you're taking issue with their goal of world peace, I'm not entirely sure I want you on my flist. It's world peace, guys. It's not going to kill you (although the opposite surely will).

Check out Obama's speech.

[amory-vain.livejournal.com]

This was the very first bit of news I woke up to this morning, and honestly, I read the text and thought I was probably still dreaming. xP

My reaction is still pretty much wait, what? I mean, if you look at past winners, this year's pick is pretty out of left field. Martti Ahtisaari, Al Gore, Muhammad Yunus--these are people who've been working for 30+ years to accomplish significant things. If you look at their credits compared to Obama's, it's kind of laughable (especially when compared to someone like Jimmy Carter or Kofi Annan).

I'm not saying he won't accomplish a lot, but it seems ridiculous to me to award this honor in the hope that he will. Maybe I'm too results/facts oriented, but even the Nobel Committee's justification paragraph seems to lack substance. Compare it to last year's announcement or 2006 to see what I mean (not shafting Al Gore; the 2007 page wouldn't load in English for some reason).

[khyros.livejournal.com]

As I said, I'm basically with you, though also I recognize amory_vain's gripe... the justification seemed a little thin and platitudinous, but I'm willing to believe that I'm somewhat ignorant of the extent of what Obama's been doing internationally.

[apwizardry.livejournal.com]

I'm glad he got it, and I think he's doing good things, but I don't know about the Nobel Peace Prize right now. Maybe next year would have been a better choice, once he had been in office longer.

Again, not saying he didn't deserve it. Just a little...wtf wow.

[siyahsaclikiz.livejournal.com]

My problem with this is, he hasn't really accomplished much. He's been in office for only 9 months, and when you look at what he has actually done, it's really not that much at all. It seems like they are giving it to him for NOT being Bush, which is as crappy a reason as they come. Why not wait for Obama to get his intentions fully translated into reality? He'll be president for the next 3 years too.

[kira-bouviea.livejournal.com]

Just wanted to say, "YAY Obama!" because I can't in RL.

And thank you for this post, it just - I haven't come across many other people who support the nomination so it's refreshing to see this.

Also, you stated it much more eloquently than I can at the moment.

[catalinacat.livejournal.com]

You know, I agree with a lot of what you said.
But -- and correct me if I'm wrong -- nominations for the Peace Prize have to be sent in by February 3rd.
That's a whopping 14 days after Obama was inaugurated as President.
And the Committee has some valid reasoning in their statement, to be sure, but I just feel like this was completely rushed. That's really my only problem with the whole situation :/

[chasingtides.livejournal.com]

Nominations were then, but the committee would definitely be looking at actions taken before then. Besides, Obama did exist and did do things before he became president.