Log In

Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Developer Area

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area



Draco. Loves. Harry. <3 ([info]dracolovesharry) wrote in [info]fandom_wank,
@ 2004-02-17 09:23:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Current mood:Candy-Coated

more fun with petitions
There's a small argument filling the pages of Livejournal's Democrat community
regarding Bush's nomination for the Nobel Peace prize.

mizundast00d made an entry on his/her journal regarding it, and then his/her friend blindfaith101 copied his/her text and threw it on an entry-- complete with A PETITION TO UN-NOMINATE BUSH AND BLAIR.

http://www.livejournal.com/community/democrats/437259.html

There is your link to the post.

Best Line:
Bush, Blair nominated for Nobel Peace Prize,o ver my dead body!
Honey, they're already nominated. Shall we kill you now or later?

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/302184339 <-- the petition.


(Post a new comment)


[info]shoiryu
2004-02-17 08:08 pm UTC (link)
Why do people still believe that those damn online petitions actually do anything?

(Reply to this)


[info]amakath
2004-02-17 08:10 pm UTC (link)
Is politics a fandom? Cuz, [info]otf_wank, is all I'm saying.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]jfpbookworm
2004-02-17 08:42 pm UTC (link)
Politics, at least American politics, is most definitely a fandom. That's most of what's wrong with it.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re:
[info]amakath
2004-02-17 09:00 pm UTC (link)
I suppose the kerfuffle between Bill O'Reilly and Al Franken does make more sense when viewed as a BNF bitchfight.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]thespacecat
2004-02-17 10:41 pm UTC (link)
That is the best thing I've read in... ever.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Hee!
[info]enkogneatoh
2004-02-18 12:04 am UTC (link)
That's perfect.

And yes, politics is a fandom. Witness the fangirlish fervor surrounding Dean, if nothing else.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Hee!
[info]amakath
2004-02-18 12:38 am UTC (link)
OMG howard is lik soooooo KAWAII!!!111!1 ^_^

(Reply to this)(Parent)

(Deleted post)

[info]crickets
2004-02-18 03:03 am UTC (link)
::hearts you:: for the Bush/pretzel slash.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]aruru
2004-02-18 05:14 am UTC (link)
Over here, people often joke about how politics is the "national sport."

...I actually find this rather accurate.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]big_bad_wolf
2004-02-17 08:25 pm UTC (link)
I believe Hitler was once nominated for said prize, and Kissinger actually won it. Said prize clearly means nothing.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]toastandbananas
2004-02-17 11:42 pm UTC (link)
I agree completely. *thumbs nose at said prize*

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]visp
2004-02-18 12:41 am UTC (link)
ICON!

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]aiwendil
2004-02-19 11:27 pm UTC (link)
See this, and, for that matter, this.

There are a lot of people who can nominate candidates for the Peace Prize, including members of national assemblies and governments, so Hitler likely did not have a lack of people willing to nominate him - which did not gain him any chance of actually getting it. The list of laureates for the Peace Prize in the time Hitler had power, includes a number of pacifists and peace-campaigners, most notably Carl von Ossietzky, who was held in German concentration-camps at the time, but also including the chairman of the League of Nations Disarmament Conference 1932-34, the Nansen International Office for Refugees, and Viscount Cecil of Chelwood (founder and President of the International Peace Campaign).

Kissinger was awarded the 1973 Nobel Peace Prize together with Le Duc Tho from North Vietnam; they had jointly negotiated the Vietnam peace accord in 1973. Le Duc Tho declined to accept the prize.

Judging the quality and relevance of the Nobel Peace Prize based on a single laureate and a single nominee is a bit like using the candidacy of Ross Perot and the term(s) of Andrew Jackson as the sole basis of judgment of quality of US government through history - neither selection is sufficient to reach a sound conclusion.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re:
[info]big_bad_wolf
2004-02-20 02:23 pm UTC (link)
*boggles*

I like you. Will you do research for me?

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]ishtar79
2004-02-17 08:35 pm UTC (link)
Bush is nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize?

Well, fuck me. Who needs fandom when RL is so wanky?

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]aiwendil
2004-02-19 10:25 pm UTC (link)
Being nominated does not in itself mean that one has been evaluated by the committee, it just means that someone has asked the committee to consider that person or organisation. To quote from the rules regarding nominations for the Nobel Peace Prize:

The prize awarding ceremony on December 10 is the final result of a long selection process. The rules permit a division of the prize among no more than three laureates. The Norwegian Nobel Committee bases its assessment on nominations that must be postmarked no later than 1 February each year. Later nominations are included in the following year's discussions. In recent years, the Committee has received well over 140 different nominations for the Peace Prize. (The numbers of nominating letters are much higher, since many are for the same candidates.)

Nominators

New nomination rules, effective from 2003. Compared to the old rules the list of nominators has been slightly expanded.
Any one of the following persons is entitled to submit proposals:
  • members of national assemblies and governments;
  • members of international courts of law;
  • university chancellors; university professors of social science, history, philosophy, law and theology;
  • leaders of peace research institutes and institutes of foreign affairs;
  • former Nobel Peace Prize laureates;
  • board members of organisations that have received the Nobel Peace Prize;
  • present and past members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee; (committee members must present their nomination at the latest at the first committee meeting after February 1);
  • former advisers at the Norwegian Nobel Institute.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]ishtar79
2004-02-19 10:46 pm UTC (link)
Ah, thanks for the clarification. I'm no longer freaked out. :)

(Reply to this)(Parent)


(Anonymous)
2004-02-17 09:04 pm UTC (link)
Stalin was time magazine's man of the year 1939 and 1941. Not as ironic as Bush being nominated for the Nobel Peace prize, but as i only found this out today, thought i'd share!

aurient

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]beccastareyes
2004-02-17 09:33 pm UTC (link)
Importance does not equal morality. For a Top Seven Most Important People of the 20th Century paper I wrote, Hitler was on the list. He radically affected 20th century history, even if it was in a morally dispicable way.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]thespacecat
2004-02-17 10:40 pm UTC (link)
Completely true. Hitler was also Time's man of the year. That was part of the reason that Giuliani being Person of the Year (as I believe they call it now) in 2001 was so hotly contested- many people felt that the only accurate choice was Osama Bin Laden, even if he wasn't a lot of people's favorite person of the year.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]smo
2004-02-17 11:44 pm UTC (link)
IIRC, the Ayatollah Khomeini got the award for similar reasons.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]eiviiaru
2004-02-17 10:11 pm UTC (link)
Man, if I ever needed a "stop being on my side, you're making my side look stupid" icon, it's now.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]rogue
2004-02-18 01:56 am UTC (link)
Here, I'll post mine, and we can sit on high rooftops and snipe them off, one at a time...

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

OT
[info]big_bad_wolf
2004-02-18 08:34 pm UTC (link)
What font is that you're using on that icon there, and is there anywhere I can download it?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: OT
[info]rogue
2004-02-18 10:36 pm UTC (link)
Which one? The little bity one or the.. er.. other one?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: OT
[info]big_bad_wolf
2004-02-19 12:25 am UTC (link)
The itty bitty one that I see all the cool kids using. Tell me! I yearn to be cool!

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]thespacecat
2004-02-17 11:02 pm UTC (link)
I think any award that's hanged out to people on a regulated basis is inherently bullshit. Best Rap Song of 1998, for instance, doesn't really mean that much. Best New Rock Group of 1963, that means something. The quality and quantity of potential cantidates fluctuates, and without taking this into account you inherently demean the value of the awards. This is different from competitions like the Olympics, the validity of which is compromised for entirely different reasons.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]thespacecat
2004-02-17 11:02 pm UTC (link)
Of course, "Best New Artist" is itself a facetious category.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Not really, it just needs a new name
[info]pfeffermuse
2004-02-18 07:05 am UTC (link)
Wouldn't better category titles for "Best New Artist" be the:

"Doubtful You'll Remember Them Next Year" award

"Hope You Invested Well" award

"Luck Not Talent Gave You 16 Minutes of Fame" award

"There Won't Be Any Royalties for Your Question on Trivial Pursuit" award

Pepper

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Not really, it just needs a new name
[info]thespacecat
2004-02-20 02:58 am UTC (link)
I was thinking more along the terms of "I've been in the industry for six years but I'm the best new artist of the year wtf?" awards.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]hansbekhart
2004-02-18 10:01 am UTC (link)
**sigh** He's ALREADY been nominated like, six times. There's thousands of people on the list, and it is really damn hard to actually WIN one of these things. I freaked out the FIRST time this happened. By now it's just "oh, that again."

(Reply to this)


[info]oxydosic
2004-02-18 03:34 pm UTC (link)
Bush...Peace Prize?

No, just...no.

(Reply to this)


[info]garlicbug
2004-02-18 05:01 pm UTC (link)
Unless I'm mistaken, this nomination happened more than a year ago. Why are people only now going on about it? And why does it matter? It's just a nomination and as lacking in faith in the world as I am, that's not an instant indication they're going to get the prize....

And why do people keep forgetting Australia's prime minister John Howard supported the war along with Bush and Blair and sent along troops (without asking) as well? Everyone's either forgotten him or never heard of him in the first place and are just concentrating on the main couple...

... Holy bejeezus! Politics really is like fandom!

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]big_bad_wolf
2004-02-18 08:35 pm UTC (link)
Oh, I remember and Howard is on my shitlist too.

I'm just too lazy to kill them.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]misswindy
2004-02-19 12:05 am UTC (link)
Nobel Peace Prizes these days must be just like the Oscars - nobody really gives a shit who wins them because they always seem to go to the most undeserving bitches while Angela Bassett Sir Ian McKellen Maggie Smith really deserving people keep being overlooked.

OMG. I just realized.

That means George W. Bush is the Halle Berry of politics.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]aiwendil
2004-02-19 10:25 pm UTC (link)
I am not certain I understand how someone has arrived at the conclusion that undeserving bitch is a suitable descriptor for such persons and entities as Aung San Suu Kyi (1991), Rigoberta Menchú Tum (1992), Nelson Mandela and Frederik Willem de Klerk (1993), Carlos Filipe Ximenes Belo and José Ramos-Horta (1996), the International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL) and Jody Williams (1997), Doctors Without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontières (1999), or The United Nations (2001).

Some wellknown laureates from earlier times include The International Committee of the Red Cross/Comité International de la Croix-Rouge (1917, 1944, and 1963), Fridtjof Nansen (1922), Carl von Ossietzky, 1935, Albert Schweitzer(1952), Hammarskjöld, Dag Hjalmar Agne Carl Hammarskjöld (1961, posthumously), The League of Red Cross Societies (and The International Committee of the Red Cross, as listed above) (1963), Martin Luther King Jr. (1964), UNICEF (1965), Andrei Sakharov (1975), Amnesty International (1977), Mother Teresa (1979), Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (1981), Lech Walesa (1983), Desmond Mpilo Tutu (1984), Elie Wiesel (1986), and the 14th Dalai Lama, Tenzin Gyatso (1989).

Nor is the prize necessarily awarded every year - there were no peace prizes awarded for the years 1914, 1915, 1916, 1918, 1923, 1924, 1928, 1932, 1939, 1940, 1941, 1942, 1943, 1948, 1955, 1956, 1966, 1967, or 1972.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]misswindy
2004-02-19 10:35 pm UTC (link)
OK. I was kidding. Unclench.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]thespacecat
2004-02-20 03:10 am UTC (link)
Since you're not certain as to what's going on, I'll clarify for you. When one bitches about the inaccuracy of an award or tournament or contest or poll or other such measure of worth or popularity or fame or whathaveyou, one doesn't necessarily mean that the accuracy of these things is totally off, but that the amount to which it is off is unacceptable. I may not be explaining this perfectly clearly, so let me use some examples; if I denounce a doctor as being incompetent, that doesn't necessarily mean that I claim that all of his patients die. It may be that only, say, a sixth of his patients die. That may mean that more often than not he does the correct thing in healing the people under his care, but he still causes too many accidents to be able to continue in his position, where another doctor might lose something more like a hundredth of his patients. Likewise, if our justice system gives the correct verdict nine times out of ten on any given defendant, but on the tenth either condemns an innocent person, or lets a guilty criminal go free, I can deride our justice system as being inadequate in it's aim without claiming that it fails most of the time. As a final example, if I build a nuclear-powered car that works perfectly for the lifetimes of 999 out of every 1,000 owners, but for the thousandth causes a meltdown that gives everyone in a half mile radius radiation poisoning, causing hundreds or even thousands of deaths, that's still a sufficent level of failure that the line of cars should be condemned.

As such, any award for peace which includes the United Nations on it's list of winners... is highly inaccurate. That's just one easy example. There are certainly more undeserving winners of the Nobel prize.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]aiwendil
2004-02-20 01:33 pm UTC (link)
As such, any award for peace which includes the United Nations on it's list of winners... is highly inaccurate.


Why?

There are certainly more undeserving winners of the Nobel prize.


Who?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]thespacecat
2004-02-23 12:51 am UTC (link)
Why?


Because the UN was created to prevent genocide. At every single test of this purpose, they have failed, putting issues like national sovereignty above human rights, and supporting and defending mass murderers.


Who?

Arafat and Jimmy Carter spring to mind, although to be honest, I'm not sure if they deserve it less than the UN per se.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

  
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map