by: Myles McReynolds
It used to be that the Nobel Peace Prize was given out for actually doing
something amazing or leading a very influential and inspiring life. Recipients
like Martin Luther King, Jr., Mother Teresa, Desmond Tutu, and the 14th Dalai
Lama resemble extremely influential and inspirational attitudes and values that
definitely merit the Prize. But these days it seems that you don’t even have to
do anything and you can be a legitimate candidate. Granted, the most recent
recipient, Barack Obama, has already done a great thing for this country showing
that it is possible for an African American to be president – something that 30
years ago people would say is impossible. But what else has he done to deserve
this coveted award? He received this award for a promise - a promise to change
our nation and get it back to what it used to be. One thing that this does is
place an extreme amount of pressure on him to turn his eloquently expressed
vision into real improvements in what are some of the world's most difficult
problems.
Even though the Nobel committee will say that the award was given for
his "extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy", not all will
agree and some may offer a counter argument saying where have those efforts led?
The committee also awarded him the Prize based on his "vision of and work for a
world without nuclear weapons." But, our world still has nuclear weapons, if not
more than before, so once again it is easy to ask – what has that vision done?
Did they give Terrell Davis the Super Bowl XXXII MVP trophy in the middle of the
first quarter? No, he had to work hard for it, suffering through pain, hit after
hit, and migraine headaches the entire time – the same rule applies in this case
(excuse the football analogy but it is a good way to look at it). Let Mr.
President prove something and change something before crowning him with the
Nobel Peace Prize. Instead give it to someone more deserving that has actually
done something to preserve the peace. I am interested and excited to see what he
can do with this added pressure and the question now is whether the president
can render his vision into a policy that protects this country's interests and
lives up to the promise of his words. What do you guys think? Was the award
merited or do you think it was a bad idea and should have gone to somebody else?
11 comments:
I’m not sure Barack Obama deserves the award. After receiving the reward he even said "I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who've been honored by this prize". However, I don’t think he was a bad choice. I believe, as do many people around the world, that Obama has led a “very influential and inspiring life” (albeit not complete). I have a much more positive outlook on the future of our country and the world than I did a year ago. You asked where improved international relations have led. Everything takes time and too many people in our country expect instant results. Whether it’s the stimulus package, disarming nuclear warheads, or benefits realized through cooperation with other countries, everything takes time. 4 years isn’t even enough time to see the kind of results people expect Obama to produce in less than 1 year. Finally, he absolutely did not receive the prize because of a promise to “change our nation and get it back to what it used to be”, unless you are only referring to once again being respected in the international community. He promised change, but not change directed at repeating past mistakes.
I also have mixed feelings about Barack Obama receiving the Nobel Peace Prize. His personal accomplishments (first african american president, promises of change, etc) are without a doubt impressive. Further, I do believe the way he brought our country together for "change" was more than admirable, especially given the political climate before he came into office. I do believe people have incredibly high expectations for this president. Even though he has been in office less than a year, many people have already made up their minds about Obama. Bottom line: Give him more time before you pass a judgement, whether that be your opinion of his effectiveness as a President or deciding whether or not to award him the Nobel Prize. Let him put his plans into action, reflect on them and than decide whether he deserves awards or not.
It does appear that the bar has been lowered... doesn't it? Gandhi, nominated in 1937,'38,'39,'47 and '48 (the year of his death) NEVER RECEIVED THE AWARD. Not good enough!
Perhaps we should see this not as a failure of the Nobel committee, but instead as a commentary on the stark state of the worldwide community. "Efforts" and a "constructive role" (words used by the nobel committee) seem to be sufficient for merit in this, The Age of Inaction!
- Alexander Rex Roberts "Rex" 12am, PSCI
Obama does not deserve the award. Simply being a "visionary" should not merit the Nobel Peace Prize. I have a "vision," where's my award? The deadline for the submissions was in February. I think it is absolutely a shame that Obama won the award when he was in office not even a month. I believe he was given the Nobel Peace Prize for "not being Bush." Keep in mind the U.S. is still in Afghanistan and Iraq, and that last week Obama ordered 13,000 more troops to Afghanistan.
Although I'm a huge supporter of Obama, I don't feel as if he's done enough to deserve the prize. Sure, he's broken the mold of what the President of our country looks like and represents, but if one looks at the other winners in his category, he stands out because he won based on what he's planning on doing and not what he's accomplished. According to an article by Newsweek, one of the reasons that he was even nominated was because of his efforts to end the war in Iraq... but it's been about 9 months since he started his term and he's already bumped up the amount of US soldiers in Iraq. On the other hand, Obama does have great plans for the future, and I seriously believe that he will make a positive impact on the world down the road, but he should be given the prize when he's made changes.
Mr. Kragor, Obama did not win the award in February. He was NOMINATED (key word) on or before February 1st. And following your logic, John McCain would be the proud owner of the Nobel Peace Prize had he won the 2009 presidential election. He is after all “not Bush”.
I definitely think that the award deserved to go to someone who has had more time to reach his goals, but it does not justify all the people I have heard patronizing Barack Obama for receiving the award. It is is not his fault he was awarded it, but he accepted it with grace and humility. He obviously understands that he is now recognized in a group of extraordinary individuals. I think that the change he makes will have a lot to do with people's attitudes towards international relations.
I think he received the award with grace and humility, which is what he should have done and what most people expected. Also, I am more than willing to give him time to change something, because he deserves it and one year isn't enough time to change a lot of things, let alone what all is on his plate. But giving him a break and giving him time isn't the debate - its whether or not he deserved the award at THIS time. I think most of us can agree that the answer to that is simple.
Yo, Obama, i'm really happy for you right now, im gonna let you finish, but Ghandi had the best Nobel Peace Prize.
No, I agree with the comments on this one, a lot of us have great IDEAS about how to conduct peace and have huge aspirations for creating that but don't yet have the resources to actually make anything happen yet. Should everyone with good ideas get Peace Prizes? If so, i want one.
well, it was time for change and Obama changed it and he was awarded for that. But, I agree,Ghandi was the well deserved nobel prize winner.
I agree with some of you, I think he was a good choice for the award but Im not sure he should have gotten it now. He has been working hard to change our nation- which is proving to be harder and harder each day with the economy, war, and various other problems we are now dealing with. But, I believe the things he has done thus far have not proven he is worthy of the Nobel Prize- he continues to work and work yet our country is still suffering- I understand things take time and he hasnt had much yet. I think the added pressure could be a good thing or a bad thing- it makes it so he has to prove that he can make the changes he has promised thus far. On the other side- if he isnt able to achieve everything he hopes to - will we still think he deserves this?
Post a Comment