that peace prize controversy

By alice | October 14, 2009

If I am missing a major point here, or being insensitive or dumb, hopefully commenters will enlighten me. But: does anyone else think that awarding the Nobel peace prize to Obama was racist?

It’s a bunch of posh white people giving a prize to the black young newcomer in order to encourage him to do what they want, isn’t it? And it makes Obama’s job harder than before, by creating pressure. And he seems to have accepted the prize through gritted teeth, which just reminds me of all sorts of mafia-type TV shows where they threaten people into accepting “gifts” that are really blackmail. Aren’t awards supposed to make the recipient happy- isn’t something else very bad going on if they’re not?

Shefaly tackles the issue more eloquently than me: [...] much coverage of the prize deems necessary that Mr Obama’s racial heritage be mentioned. Wangari Maathai, a former Nobel Peace prize recipient, speaking on BBC’s News 24, also said that it was one of the reasons why Mr Obama’s prize was well-deserved. Mr Obama probably does not want to be the poster-boy of the Nobel Committee’s “race-inclusive” decisions. Especially at a time when he is at pains to say that race is not behind his policy measures being opposed at home. But having been given the prize, he is caught in the middle of this politically sensitive issue.

I feel we are in relative private here on my personal blog, and not at risk of distracting politicians from proper political issues, so hopefully it’s OK to indulge in grumbles about people being bigoted. In personal life, these things matter: we often have very warped radars for people’s behaviour being “off”, the results of which can be disastrous (I feel strongly about that). We can and should learn lessons from how people behave towards each other in public life. This isn’t just about the world of international politics and relations, it can show us something about people’s failures to get along.

I’m not convinced by Obama’s politics, he reminds me too much of early Tony Blair- but that’s nothing to do with this. Making Obama a poster boy- or indeeed any kind of a “boy” (!!) definitely seems outrageous enough to me that the ire rises whenever I think about this. Pshaw.

Of course, Obama could have refused the prize, but there are many political factors at play here, and I’m assuming he did what he thought most politick, rather than what he felt inclined to do. Which may have been to shove it up… well, who knows.

* Powerful white people calling a black man “boy”, or treating him in a patronising, superior way, has strongly racist overtones reminiscent of the bad old days in the southern United States.

(Having written and read over this, I think a more rational response than ire is probably that this sort of thing is only to be expected. Posting it anyway.)

2 Comments »

2 Responses to “that peace prize controversy”

gcotharn Says:
October 15th, 2009 at 10:02 pm

You are exactly correct. That’s not all there was to it: the Norwegians are trying to manipulate Barack. However, there was a condescending and pretentious dose of patting the cute black child on the head. If the U.S. President were named Mark Nelson, then the Nobel never would have been awarded.

As bonus, the Norwegians simultaneously get to bash President Bush and jab us hillbilly ‘Muricans for our horrifying endemic racism. For the Nobel Committee: win/win/win.

And I could not possibly care less. The Nobel Peace Prize Committee had already taught us (Arafat, Jimmy Carter) that they were irrelevant twits. When I saw that Barack had won, I was overtaken with an uncontrollable attack of laughter at the action of the Committee. I do appreciate them for the humor they provide. So, they do have some value.

Theocritus Says:
October 24th, 2009 at 12:31 am

Even “Time” sneered at the Nobel committee, calling it the fourth Nobel Peace Prize for Not Being George Bush.

Perhaps it was racist; I hadn’t thought of it that way. But it made me think of a phrase that Bush used: “The soft racism of low expectations.” But Obama, of all presidents, has by far the slimmest resume. Giving a Nobel to someone who never served a full term and mostly voted “present” is not recognizing achievement.

Yes, I suppose it is racist.

Thomas Sowell (always worth reading): “Barack Obama has the kind of cocksure confidence that can only be achieved by not achieving anything else.”

We heard his campaign talking about the hope and change they’d brought even before they got into office. We heard the same guff from the Clintons right after their election.

I think that this was just a bunch of pissy Norwegians who have never in their lifetimes had to be responsible for themselves wanting to put yet another finger in the eye of George W. Bush. Who did not pay them enough heed for their amour propre. Perhaps if Bush had sent them an iPod with his speeches Gore, Carter and Obama wouldn’t have gotten a Nobel.