2010 Nobel Peace Prize a disgrace

[CardSharp]

I donno but in my opinion if his methods are peaceful....then he should be left to himself.....and also left to gather support of people for his movement (of-course if he does get any)....but then u people know ur law of land better......

Note: I guess it is getting difficult for west to come in terms with the dinosaurous growth of China.....

No one has problems with him speaking his mind. (my parents oddly thinks he has *some* valid points, w/e they are better read than I). What I and probably others resent is his being turned into a political football by the west and his collaboration with those who are outright racists.

 

[TruthSeeker]

The Nobel Peace Prize is totally political. The winner must be someone whom European democratic socialists can admire. That means no one who is a patriot of their own country can win since patriotism is against the "one world" philosophy of the Committee. I think the Economics Prize is worthless also. Economics cannot be a "science". If it was, then it would be clear how to solve various economic "crises" that humanity has had in the past and continues to have. The economists actually cannot solve any serious problem. Their prescriptions are pure guesses. I believe in the prizes for physics, chemistry, biology and medicine. The rest are worthless.

 

[CardSharp]

The Nobel Peace Prize is totally political. The winner must be someone whom European democratic socialists can admire. That means no one who is a patriot of their own country can win since patriotism is against the "one world" philosophy of the Committee. I think the Economics Prize is worthless also. Economics cannot be a "science". If it was, then it would be clear how to solve various economic "crises" that humanity has had in the past and continues to have. The economists actually cannot solve any serious problem. Their prescriptions are pure guesses. I believe in the prizes for physics, chemistry, biology and medicine. The rest are worthless.

Completely agree. Whereas a merit based case can be made and is made for the scientific Nobel prizes, it is impossible for the peace prize to be merit based unless you happen to agree with the views espoused by the committee that made the selection.

 

[TOPGUN]

I seem to think and see more indians getting upset .. lolz cuz its not them winning so what a chinesse won be happy for it don't hate jerks.

 

[parasite]

I seem to think and see more indians getting upset .. lolz cuz its not them winning so what a chinesse won be happy for it don't hate jerks.

I dont think u will find many Indians who hate china....there are of-course some reasonable concerns about growing military might of china.......but for their economic growth most people(including me) are happy for them....

 

[below_freezing]

Completely agree. Whereas a merit based case can be made and is made for the scientific Nobel prizes, it is impossible for the peace prize to be merit based unless you happen to agree with the views espoused by the committee that made the selection.

All nobel prize winners are good scientists but not all good scientists even have the potential for a nobel prize.

Chemical engineering or aerospace will never win a nobel prize.

 

[CardSharp]

All nobel prize winners are good scientists but not all good scientists even have the potential for a nobel prize.

Chemical engineering or aerospace will never win a nobel prize.

This will change. China still lags far behind the US and Europe but the main advantage of the US and Europe is not white people's ability and the yellow man's inability to innovate but the problem of capital, research infrastructure, and tradition. All these things can and will be acquired over time.

As for the Swedes, let them crow and discriminate. We should develop the mindset of favouring our own values and be apathetic to the praise and criticism of westerners*.


*Westerners being used for lack of a better word for these people.

 

[no_name]

Someone like Mother Teresa getting the Nobel Peace Prize would be very legitimate. It's really a shame.

 

[below_freezing]

This will change. China still lags far behind the US and Europe but the main advantage of the US and Europe is not white people's ability and the yellow man's inability to innovate but the problem of capital, research infrastructure, and tradition. All these things can and will be acquired over time.

As for the Swedes, let them crow and discriminate. We should develop the mindset of favouring our own values and be apathetic to the praise and criticism of westerners*.


*Westerners being used for lack of a better word for these people.

I did not mention regions at all. My father who holds a PhD in material and physical chemistry has said: material science will never win a nobel prize; it is too applied and all advances are too incremental. his area of research was piezoelectrics for use in underwater detection. there will never be a major breakthrough that can be attributed to one person.

Same with aerospace and chemical engineering. There is no "one" person to attribute a prize to.

 

[jha]

I seem to think and see more indians getting upset .. lolz cuz its not them winning so what a chinesse won be happy for it don't hate jerks.

 

[Patrician]

The Nobel Peace Prize is totally political. The winner must be someone whom European democratic socialists can admire. That means no one who is a patriot of their own country can win since patriotism is against the "one world" philosophy of the Committee. I think the Economics Prize is worthless also. Economics cannot be a "science". If it was, then it would be clear how to solve various economic "crises" that humanity has had in the past and continues to have. The economists actually cannot solve any serious problem. Their prescriptions are pure guesses. I believe in the prizes for physics, chemistry, biology and medicine. The rest are worthless.

You wouldn't say that if you'd heard of:

Amartya Sen
Paul Krugman(more recently)

As far as Krugman is concerned, he's a very highly regarded NYT columnist and I regularly read his articles.

That guy is simply too good.

The problem with economists is that their policies are left up to politicians and the bureaucracy to plan and execute and we all know how messy a thing that is.

Couple it with the populist measures that politicians have to take in order to preserve their constituency.

Economics--Good
Economics + Populism--Bad

 

[below_freezing]

You wouldn't say that if you'd heard of:

Amartya Sen
Paul Krugman(more recently)

As far as Krugman is concerned, he's a very highly regarded NYT columnist and I regularly read his articles.

That guy is simply too good.

The problem with economists is that their policies are left up to politicians and the bureaucracy to plan and execute and we all know how messy a thing that is.

Couple it with the populist measures that politicians have to take in order to preserve their constituency.

Economics--Good
Economics + Populism--Bad

problem is, economic nobel prize is sort of strange. what about those who have real economic achievements in planning and policy? they will never get the prize, only theorists do.

 

[Patrician]

problem is, economic nobel prize is sort of strange. what about those who have real economic achievements in planning and policy? they will never get the prize, only theorists do.

I believe as far as economists are concerned, they are all theorists because their job ends at the suggesting/idea formation stage.

The execution and large scale planning is the job of the polity/bureaucracy.

A doctor can only prescribe the medicine but it is not the doctor's job to see to it that his advice/prescription is being followed.

It is the job of the patient. It would be unfair to blame the doctor for the patient's callousness.

A prime example is Indian PM, MMS.

That guy is a great economist but he could not help India until he was put into a really powerful chair as that of the finance minister.

 

[topjumper]

You wouldn't say that if you'd heard of:

Amartya Sen
Paul Krugman(more recently)

As far as Krugman is concerned, he's a very highly regarded NYT columnist and I regularly read his articles.

That guy is simply too good.

The problem with economists is that their policies are left up to politicians and the bureaucracy to plan and execute and we all know how messy a thing that is.

Couple it with the populist measures that politicians have to take in order to preserve their constituency.

Economics--Good
Economics + Populism--Bad

No offence my friend, Krugman is a populist writer and in the investment world he's seen as an idiot. His one (and only) solution to all our economic problems of (decades of) over-spending is to print and spend even more, his (politically motived) policies/articles make helicopter ben's look tame in comparison. There's a reason why people like him earns a living by writing for newspapers but not by investing his own money.

http://seekingalpha.com/news/market_currents/post/58016?v=1286554097

 

[Hasbara Buster]

Nobel prize often is strategically used to send a political message. In this case, the growth of communist China is irking the west and they are trying in their own petty way to show the nation in a bad light.

Yes, it's as simple as that. It hurts to see that so many people are not aware of this fact. Isn't it amazing how western cultural imperialism has been able to blind most people to this extent. I mean anything the west says or does is always perceived as good, noble, flawless, right and unquestionable. How can people be so incredibly naive and have such a low opinion of their own culture and civilization?