On Peace #It'sOn

The Nobel Prize institution has become corrupted, in my humble opinion. Talk about centralization leading to capture and corruption. We should have seen it coming when Obama won the prize for peace before his presidency began. Isn't that declaring victory prematurely? Even he was embarrassed, speaking of being put between a rock and a hard place. 

Regardless of your world views and politics, Obama didn't deserve it. His win of the presidency in 2008 was not his doing single-handedly. It was his campaign manager's and the thousands of idealist men and woman who believed in Martin Luther King's dream. It is not the color of your skin , it is the content of your character. Why can't a black man be president? 

Having said that, that fact alone, a Black president, doesn't lead to peace, Nobel Prize people. He has to prove it. Proof of Work, not Proof of Stake. Nobel Prizes used to be won only when something is "proven" in real life over a long period of time. That way we can be sure it is not a fluke or accidental. Consistency was the key. Which is why when the Nobel Prize is finally conferred on someone or something, it was "nominal" in nature. It was a caving-in of sorts. It was as if the Nobel people were finally admitting defeat. They were saying "we have examined your body of work, so we are finally conferring the prize." 

My favorite example of this is when Gabriel Garcia Marquez won the Nobel Prize in Literature for "One Hundred Years of Solitude" and not "Love in the Time of Cholera" which is his most famous book. Now the Nobel Prize committee awards prizes in peace and science for unproven ideas and unrealized promises. 
What's next? Are they going to go against their own rule and start awarding prizes posthumously? Really? Then, they can start with Amos Tversky. I jest. Oh wait. I just remembered another dead person who should've won a prize, not for "Infinite Jest", but for the greatest speech on water delivered to the graduates of Keyon College. So David Foster Wallace next. 

This whole post had a point. But I digress a lot. The person who should have won the Nobel Prize in Peace should have been Jerry Springer, not Barrack Hussein Obama. They got the wrong Chicagoan. Why you ask? Because he said and most importantly did, and I quote, "held up a mirror to society." 

People thought his show was low brow and for stupid people. It had guests who fought on stage and life stories that were of the sensationalist type. People he invited to come were not rich and famous like Oprah's guests, another Chicagoan. Nothing against Oprah, I liked her show. Jerry's guests were the "bottom feeders of civilization." What people who criticized Jerry didn't know he was doing the world a service. God's work really. He was reminding people we are not better than others. 

Just because we have money, degrees, nice houses, nice things, and high positions in the "life ladder", we are still a base animal, complete with an amygdala, our reptilian brain. Fight or flight, as a short hand. The animal brain is our survival mechanism, honed over millions of years thanks to evolution and natural selection. We should look for ourself in people we think we are beneath us. We should seek to understand those people whom we can't relate to. We should look in the looking glass. The man in the mirror, as Michael Jackson song.

Hey, Nobel Prize committee, find your integrity, get back on the right track. Reward people who actually accomplish things and merit awards. Don't grand-stand. Give Jerry Springer a Nobel Prize in Peace already!