[HN Gopher] Nobel Peace Prize 2025: Maria Corina Machado
___________________________________________________________________
Nobel Peace Prize 2025: Maria Corina Machado
Author : pykello
Score : 538 points
Date : 2025-10-10 09:03 UTC (13 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.nobelprize.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.nobelprize.org)
| haunter wrote:
| ~10 hours or so before the announcement bets on her skyrocketed
| on Polymarket
|
| https://x.com/polymarket/status/1976434242386317640
|
| Someone without any history whatsoever put 70k on her 5 hours
| before the announcement
|
| https://x.com/polywhalewatch/status/1976499384373121488
|
| Trump was never above 5-10% and out of nowhere she was the winner
| (see the 1 day market view) https://polymarket.com/event/nobel-
| peace-prize-winner-2025?t...
| jychang wrote:
| This isn't illegal but feels like it should be illegal. You
| don't see corporate officers trade their stocks right before a
| big announcement, because there are laws on it.
|
| Other than the fact that polymarket is legally not a stock
| market, what really is the difference between insider trading
| on a stock market vs insider trading on polymarket? Does anyone
| have a good argument for why one should be illegal while the
| other is legal?
| lordnacho wrote:
| It's to the benefit of the market to have such rules, so it's
| likely a matter of time, assuming growth continues.
| eru wrote:
| Just the opposite. It's to the 'benefit of the market' to
| let insiders trade. That is, if you think that the point of
| a prediction market is to get accurate predictions (and the
| point of a financial market is to get accurate prices).
|
| However, I agree that they might get rules against this.
| But not to benefit the market, just because people think
| this would be proper. Social desirability bias is strong.
| names_are_hard wrote:
| In the long run, if participants feel they can't ever win
| because there's always an insider taking advantage, then
| participants might leave and that's to the detriment of
| the market. So it might be in the interest of the market
| to make sure everyone has a fair enough chance. Finding
| the right balance here is somewhat of an art.
|
| This is similar to the way all football teams benefit
| from fair referees and even matches, even if sometimes it
| means they lose.
|
| Also: the point of an exchange is to make money.
| Different types of exchanges have different fee
| structures, but generally their profit is a function of
| volume, so there primary objective is to attract volume.
| Since every trade / bet requires two participants, they
| need to balance the needs of both participants to make it
| work. Price discovery is a positive side effect of
| efficient and fair markets, which is why as a society we
| like them and encourage them, but it isn't what they are
| trying to achieve except inasmuch as it encourages
| participation.
| mnx wrote:
| The argument goes, the purpose of prediction markets is not
| to be fair, it's to provide information. Allowing insider
| trading benefits that purpose. And I think that's fair - this
| is not a place to invest your retirement savings, it's
| essentially gambling.
| CaptainOfCoit wrote:
| I kind of feel like abusing the information asymmetry when
| doing insider trading in a betting market should be illegal
| regardless if the purpose is to provide information or not,
| or if it's considered gambling or not. Just like doing so
| with stocks is illegal today.
| johnthewise wrote:
| why? The purpose of the prediction market is not to be
| fair to market participants, it's to aggregate
| information regarding an event. There is a public benefit
| to allowing participants to bet on insider information.
| It could be even argued there is nothing unfair about it
| if everyone is free to do it/can anticipate others might
| have insider info. If we actually limited the market to
| participants who have insider information(not feasible
| because we can't verify), that'd be a great public
| utility. this is the next best thing for all those who
| don't participate in it. These are specialized markets
| and we shouldn't rush to 'protect' people who bet on very
| technical events happening.
| edanm wrote:
| Why? This net saves people money, because it makes
| markets reflect reality faster.
|
| Other than a vague sense of "fairness", can you
| articulate why insider trading should be illegal?
| Fraterkes wrote:
| It being unfair might dissuade people from using it, that
| would kinda compromise the goal of helping markets
| reflect reality
| edanm wrote:
| But no one is actually _hurt_ by it.
|
| (I'm not saying you're wrong, btw. People aren't always
| rational.)
| jychang wrote:
| Smart people are financially hurt by it.
|
| Isn't that the entire point of the prediction market
| model? You derive the wisdom of the crowd by enabling
| smarter people who make better educated guesses as
| predictions (from the same access to information as
| others) to win out over time. They are incentivized to do
| this financially, by winning bets.
|
| If markets just becomes "first person to cheat takes
| all", then there's no incentive to NOT cheat. So you
| drive away the people who power the prediction market in
| the absence of information. Over time, this means that
| the prediction market is just random noise until a leaker
| publishes news. At that point, you might as well as just
| skip the middleman and just make a website "LeakNews"
| where you can directly offer bounties that goes towards a
| reward paid out to a leaker for news you are interested
| in.
| modeless wrote:
| The purpose of banning insider trading in markets is not
| "fairness". The purpose is to encourage participation. We
| want to promote investment in the stock market by the
| general public who don't have insider information,
| because that stimulates the economy by providing capital
| for productive businesses.
|
| Prediction markets don't provide capital for productive
| businesses. The only purpose of a prediction market is to
| get accurate predictions. Insider information makes the
| predictions more accurate. Unlike the stock market, we
| don't need to encourage public participation in
| prediction markets. In fact we might want to discourage
| it because it's essentially gambling. Therefore, we
| should definitely not outlaw insider trading in
| prediction markets.
| jychang wrote:
| Participation by the general public is an important part
| of prediction markets! That's the entire point of the
| wisdom of the crowd. Before an insider tilts the market
| in one direction, in the absence of much insider
| information, prediction market advocates point out that
| the prediction market will still capture information
| value that you can't glean from just one source.
|
| If you discourage public participation in prediction
| markets "oh I will just lose my money to an insider a few
| hours or days before the final result, so why bother",
| then the end result is that nobody participates until an
| insider makes a big bet. Then the market is worthless
| until the insiders jump in. Is that really what
| prediction market advocates want?
|
| The other point is that:
|
| > Prediction markets don't provide capital for productive
| businesses
|
| Is not true. There's more than just capital in terms of
| cash. There's human capital (employees), brand value...
| and importantly, information. Which is what prediction
| markets intend to do in the future: become an information
| value source for productive businesses.
|
| Money isn't the only unit of value.
|
| Allowing insider trading seems like a nearsighted way to
| increase volume for prediction markets, at the cost of
| long term value.
| modeless wrote:
| Emperically, we have plenty of participation by the
| public in prediction markets without a prohibition on
| insider trading. We don't need to encourage any more.
|
| > Allowing insider trading seems like a nearsighted way
| to increase volume for prediction markets, at the cost of
| long term value.
|
| It's exactly the opposite. Banning insider trading in
| prediction markets would be a nearsighted way to increase
| volume (by encouraging more public participation) at the
| cost of long term value (accuracy, because insiders have
| the accurate information). Prediction markets can only be
| an "information value source" to the extent that they are
| accurate.
| jychang wrote:
| > Emperically, we have plenty of participation by the
| public in prediction markets without a prohibition on
| insider trading.
|
| That's not true. As mentioned in this thread, the UK has
| laws in general against this (for betting). The USA also
| already has laws against specifically insider financial
| disclosures (Regulation FD) for corporations, that also
| applies to betting on prediction markets (Dirks vs SEC
| ruling in the general case). I'm not sure if Regulation
| FD applies to Nobel prizes, though, as that's not
| regulated by the SEC, and I'm not sure if the USA has
| general laws on illegal betting. But therefore, I do not
| think you can claim that "there is no prohibition on
| insider trading", as that's already clearly mostly
| illegal and thus already priced in for the public
| participation in prediction markets.
|
| > It's exactly the opposite. Banning insider trading in
| prediction markets would be a nearsighted way to increase
| volume (by encouraging more public participation) at the
| cost of long term value (accuracy, because insiders have
| the accurate information).
|
| Again, the current laws already ban insider trading from
| corporate sources, so the status quo is already what I
| propose; you don't see insiders trade on predictions like
| "would OpenAI release GPT-5 in 2025" as that's against
| the law.
|
| > Prediction markets can only be an "information value
| source" to the extent that they are accurate.
|
| This is also not true. Bayes Theorem! The information
| does not need to be fully accurate, just _more accurate_
| , enough to update from P(A) to P(A|B) given P(B), where
| P(B) is the prediction market's price on a certain
| prediction! That means an inaccurate prediction market
| can still inform your knowledge updates, if you can
| derive information from it.
| ur-whale wrote:
| > This isn't illegal but feels like it should be illegal.
|
| Why?
|
| Is someone forcing you to place bets at gunpoint?
| eru wrote:
| If you actually want to know 'why' people think so, have a
| look at all the discussions around insider trading in
| financial markets. No one is forcing you to buy stocks at
| gunpoint, either.
|
| (And, yes, there are good arguments in favour of allowing
| insider trading in all markets, and a few against.)
| johnthewise wrote:
| It's easier to justify stock markets banning insider
| information because there are ignorant participants
| through their investment funds who we would like to
| protect. Why would we protect willing participants
| betting on arbitrary events? Even if we ban on this one
| too, should we in general be able to create a market that
| explicitly allows insider information for some arbitrary
| thing, insideinformationverywelcomemarket, where everyone
| is aware it's the main point of the market or shall we
| just protect these people from themselves?
| eru wrote:
| > You don't see corporate officers trade their stocks right
| before a big announcement, because there are laws on it.
|
| Depends on jurisdiction.
| tabular wrote:
| If the goal is accurate predictions, then the market works
| much better with insider trading like this.
| gadders wrote:
| In the UK some MPs and police officers put bets on the date
| of the next general election on the basis of inside
| information. Apparently you can be prosecuted for cheating in
| a bet:
|
| "The investigation, initiated in June 2024, focused on
| individuals suspected of using confidential information -
| specifically advance knowledge of the proposed election date
| - to gain an unfair advantage in betting markets. Such
| actions constitute an offence of cheating under Section 42 of
| the Gambling Act 2005, a criminal offence."
|
| https://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/news/article/gambling-.
| ..
| progbits wrote:
| > Does anyone have a good argument for why one should be
| illegal while the other is legal?
|
| I don't care either way but for the sake of argument:
|
| Stock market is something you can't avoid (ignoring hermits),
| so an insider trade can ruin your pension fund or other
| financial wellbeing with you having no way to opt out of the
| risk, so the government protects you. (This is good!)
|
| Polymarket is more like a bet between friends. You don't have
| to play but if you do understand it's unregulated and someone
| can cheat.
| myrmidon wrote:
| The purpose of the stock market is to play matchmaker between
| companies and capital. Insider trading erodes trust of
| unaffiliated capital owners and thus hurts the purpose.
|
| A prediction market, on the other hand, aims to provide the
| best possible probabilities on events (arguably), and
| "insider trading" _helps_ that purpose.
| vovavili wrote:
| It would be interesting to see if someone can develop insider
| trading tracking algorithms to uncover highly probable useful
| information out of prediction markets before major public
| announcements. It would be unfair to people involved in
| markets, but highly beneficial to everyone else, at least so
| long as prediction markets remain relatively niche.
| mrguyorama wrote:
| Are you suggesting that an unregulated gambling system
| primarily advocated for by gamblers in an ecosystem rife with
| _degenerate_ gambling and outright fraud that advertises itself
| with an _entirely theoretical and vibes based_ theory of
| "better information" that is primarily filled with people
| desperate to make gambling a "good thing" and provides ample
| opportunity for the incestuous and deeply connected crypto
| community to fleece people who have repeatedly demonstrated
| themselves to be delicious targets...
|
| You think maybe that might not be on the straight and narrow?
|
| Maybe we should get people to bet on it! Gamblers routinely
| show that they have a strong understanding of the world, right?
| What? No I don't have a problem. Hey do you have a few dollars
| I can borrow?
| s-a-p wrote:
| I know a big baby that isn't going to be happy about this one :)
| torlok wrote:
| This does look like the second best option, given his current
| agenda, though.
| geremiiah wrote:
| Check her Twitter. She supports Trump.
| catlikesshrimp wrote:
| She has to support anybody who doesn't side with Maduro. If
| Trump starts "admiring" or "falling in love with" or
| something new, she would backtrack.
| ErneX wrote:
| See I truly respect President Boric from Chile, it's one of
| the few progressive leaders from the region that has been
| outspoken about the Maduro regime and calling it what it is:
| a dictatorship. Unlike other leaders of the region who could
| be doing way more.
|
| It's pretty understandable for Mrs. Corina to take whatever
| support she gets internationally.
| pydry wrote:
| Including from a certain genocidal regime in the middle
| east which she supports:
|
| https://x.com/VenteVenezuela/status/1286346531591852036
|
| Providing her with this award while Trump's naval battle
| groups stand ready to attack Venezuela isnt helping arrest
| the collapse of the west's moral authority.
| ErneX wrote:
| Probably not, but it also sheds some light on left
| leaning democracies that are too soft with the Maduro
| regime just because they share some ideology.
| jayknight wrote:
| Let's see what Trump has to say about her...
| amanaplanacanal wrote:
| I'm guessing he will take credit for her getting the prize.
| rolandog wrote:
| Yeah, I'm wondering if the Nobel Peace prize has anything to
| do with peace for people, or for her neoliberalism stance of
| protection of the free market that would usher peace for the
| business interests of oil companies [0].
|
| I must confess I am no Venezuelan political expert, and it
| always gives me pause whether the economic siege that has
| been laid against Venezuela with the sanctions is about
| democracy, or about access to unrestricted markets ( _a la_
| United Fruit Company -- now Chiquita -- and Standard Fruit
| Company -- now Dole plc).
|
| [0]: https://www.instagram.com/reel/DKU-8MCO10P/
| pjc50 wrote:
| The problem in South America is that both versions are
| true. The outside exploitation pressures are extremely
| strong, so any vaguely socialist government succumbs to the
| temptation to squash the outside agitators .. and any local
| opposition who actually have a valid point or real anti-
| corruption objections. Running a moderate social democrat
| centrist country in that situation is not stable, instead
| you get pendulum swings from left to right and back again,
| with significant human cost along the way.
|
| (exception maybe Costa Rica?)
|
| To be clear, Venezuela is long past the "popular socialism"
| phase and decayed into the "strongman holding on" phase.
| kipchak wrote:
| There is also a substantial amount of mostly unexploited
| rare earth elements like Coltan.
| ludwik wrote:
| That's like saying Volodymyr Zelenskyy supports Trump.
| Foreign politicians operate outside of U.S. domestic politics
| - they don't get to choose other countries' leaders. Their
| job is to use diplomacy to navigate international politics in
| whatever shape those politics happen to be in.
| philistine wrote:
| Exactly. People talk as if she's voting for the guy.
| LightBug1 wrote:
| Not blanket support, only in relation to Venezuela. Which
| isn't hard. Even for the orangutan...
| LightBug1 wrote:
| Fuck. I should have qualified the above with "Not
| necessarily blanket support".
|
| A little further research and she sounds like Mrs
| orangutan.
| kelvinjps10 wrote:
| It's because he is the current president of the US and US
| support it's key for the liberation of Venezuela, she also
| supported Biden and Kamala Harris, have Kamala Harris won she
| would have "supported" her. And it's not like she supports
| Trump, she is not on favor of his policies but she knows his
| support it's necessary.
| ks2048 wrote:
| She said her favorite politician was Thatcher, so seems
| like a right-wing liberal.
|
| She supports the sanctions against Venezuela. I wonder what
| her views are on US-backed military regime-change and
| blowing-up random Venezuelan boats.
| SalmoShalazar wrote:
| She has explicitly stated she is in favor of those acts
| of violence against her country.
| drstewart wrote:
| Yep, but why do we care what the socialist dictator Maduro
| thinks?
| Parae wrote:
| I don't think they are talking about Maduro, but a big blond
| haired baby who likes burger and fascism.
| throw-the-towel wrote:
| This is a tangent, but this type of You-Know-Who speech is
| so irritating. If you want to say Trump just say it, don't
| dance around it like he's some kind of god who'll punish
| you if you say his name in vain.
| toofy wrote:
| people are getting in very real world trouble for saying
| negative things about certain people or their friends.
|
| i'm not sure if you've seen how many people have lost
| their jobs for saying truths about kurk or how many
| people are losing jobs, scholarships, visas, education
| etc for saying things about a certain regime, but it's
| happening, for real. they're actively pushing to force
| people to turn over their social media accounts for
| review.
|
| we can't blame this poster for vagueposting here. i often
| pushback against vagueposting but in today's climate we
| cant blame people for taking their personal safety
| seriously when it comes to vocalizing their criticisms.
| pjc50 wrote:
| Sadly, everyone knows what you mean and vagueposting is
| no protection.
|
| I'm reminded of the (apocryphal?) Russian protestor
| arrested for holding a blank piece of paper.
| bloak wrote:
| I don't know about Russia but there seem to be loads of
| cases of people being arrested (or detained or harrassed
| by police) for holding up a blank piece of paper,
| including one case in Cornwall:
| https://netpol.org/2023/02/10/cornish-protester-
| assaulted-an...
|
| In Singapore someone was charged for holding up a piece
| of cardboard with a smiley face drawn on it:
| https://www.economist.com/asia/2020/11/26/public-order-
| in-si...
| throw-the-towel wrote:
| That was a Soviet-era joke, then it actually happened
| several times under Putin.
| 998244353 wrote:
| I seriously doubt saying "big blond haired baby who likes
| burger and fascism" instead of "Trump" would have made a
| difference for these people.
| lovelearning wrote:
| Because "just say it" doesn't work on many sites. I don't
| know about this site but anecdotally, I've seen that when
| I use certain words / phrases / names on YouTube or
| Reddit subreddits, those comments are either not shown at
| all (not shown even to me) or shadow-banned (not shown to
| others).
|
| Another reason I don't just say it sometimes is to avoid
| trolling by fans of whatever or whoever I criticized.
| yoyohello13 wrote:
| I guess we can test the theory now.
|
| Fuck Donald J. Trump, worst President of the Untied
| States in history.
| astrange wrote:
| Objection, Andrew Johnson is the worst US president in
| history.
| jansan wrote:
| That is nonsense. Even if the Gaza deal was worthy a Nobel
| Peace Prize, nobody, including Trump, would expect to be
| honored two days after the deal.
| ddrdrck_ wrote:
| You mean, nobody _except_ Trump.
| mw67 wrote:
| The deal won't even last, we all know Israel can't stop
| killing until they get all the lands they want, and Trump
| knows it too:
| https://x.com/Megatron_ron/status/1976374346538156429
| eru wrote:
| They should really have given him one before the deal. I
| mean, Obama got one just for showing up.
|
| (To be clear, I don't think Trump should get one; and Obama's
| win was really weird. But, hey, if Kissinger can get one..)
| kgwgk wrote:
| Maybe they didn't want to make the same mistake:
|
| Nobel secretary regrets Obama peace prize
|
| https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34277960
| anilakar wrote:
| When you fuck up world peace so badly your successor gets
| the prize for doing nothing...
| rkomorn wrote:
| Not even "for doing nothing", more like "before doing
| anything". He wasn't even 10 months into his presidency.
|
| If there's one job in the world where I'd wait until
| someone's well out of office before judging their impact
| on peace, it's the US presidency.
|
| I'm in a circle of people who lean pretty damn far left
| and even at the time, the only reactions I heard were
| "huh, what?"
| eru wrote:
| > If there's one job in the world where I'd wait until
| someone's well out of office before judging their impact
| on peace, it's the US presidency.
|
| Sure, but if you want your prize to have an impact, you
| sometimes have to hand it out to hopefuls?
| rkomorn wrote:
| I dunno. Do you? Does the Nobel prize have a history of
| shaping the future? Did winning the Nobel prize make
| Obama a different president? Was it supposed to?
|
| To me, it seemed oddly aspirational, but maybe that's
| more often the case with the peace prize, too.
|
| Also worth noting that the language in the press release
| [1] and facts page [2] makes it all sound like it was for
| things already achieved (although maybe that's at odds
| with "Inspires Hope for a Better Future"), and I'm
| skeptical of looking at year 1 achievements the job with
| arguably the most destructive power in the world.
|
| It's not a hill I'd fight, let alone die, on, though. :)
|
| 1- https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/2009/press-
| release/ 2-
| https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/2009/obama/facts/
| myrmidon wrote:
| If you wanted to avoid "misnominations", you'd be forced
| to wait until the career of the nominee is _over_
| (meaning in many cases: award it posthumously).
|
| But the Nobel price explicitly tries to avoid that;
| hindsight is always gonna be better.
| rkomorn wrote:
| Yeah. I'm just okay special casing "against" heads of
| state.
| vjvjvjvjghv wrote:
| That's not how it works. The prizes are not motivational
| but for achievement . Otherwise we should give the
| physics prize to some school kid in the hope of them
| discovering quantum gravity
| netsharc wrote:
| Even Obama said basically those words when he got a call
| from his staff at 6AM announcing that he had won, and he
| said in the press conference that he didn't feel he
| deserved it (I looked this up in his 2020 book Promised
| Land).
|
| Meanwhile for Trump... I'm pretty certain he wants it
| because a clever, charismatic, eloquent and beloved Black
| man got it...
| ekianjo wrote:
| Obama was not doing nothing, he actively killed people by
| drones more than anyone before him. Nobel endorsed
| killer.
| cosmicgadget wrote:
| Even more than FDR!?!
| rsynnott wrote:
| The Obama one was pretty much for not being George W Bush
| (or, more to the point, not being controlled by Dick Cheney
| et al; Bush himself wasn't the _real_ problem there).
| They'd probably have given it to McCain if he'd won, too.
| People were _really_ worried about Bush and pals; by the
| end Cheney was pushing Bush to _start a war with Iran_.
| timeon wrote:
| Kissinger's decision is debatable but legit. That time it
| was not only about him. It was just pathetic from him to
| took it when his co-winner declined.
|
| Price for Obama was probably miss-step but at least he was
| not desperately begging for it like Trump does.
| nevi-me wrote:
| You assume that we're dealing with a rational person who has
| all their senses intact.
|
| The deal would likely take months for the world to see if
| it's successful. He can get nominated next year if he keeps
| his own house peaceful too, else he should forget about a
| rational nomination + award of the Prize.
| philipallstar wrote:
| You're not dealing with anyone. There's a chap in the white
| house you don't like, and you want to have a pre-emptive go
| at him. Either he doesn't say anything, in which case you
| forget you said this. Or he is upset, in which case you
| feel justified in this. Or he's happy for the winner, in
| which case you feel like if he mentions it at all he must
| be upset.
|
| If there's no way for you to change your stance based on
| any outcome, then it's pointless to say.
| greggoB wrote:
| I like how in turn you're having a preemptive go at this
| person.
|
| Also: the day Trump shows genuine selfless happiness for
| another's accomplishments, there won't be enough boots
| for me to eat.
| philipallstar wrote:
| I am actually dealing with a person though, and have set
| out a falsifiable case.
|
| > Also: the day Trump shows genuine selfless happiness
| for another's accomplishments, there won't be enough
| boots for me to eat.
|
| Same, but it's also true for anyone else.
| greggoB wrote:
| > I am actually dealing with a person though, and have
| set out a falsifiable case.
|
| As have they? We have many tests for determining whether
| or not a given person's senses are or not intact.
|
| > Same, but it's also true for anyone else.
|
| Note I said _show_. If you happen to live in a world
| where you feel you 've been devoid of such empathy then I
| feel for you, but such an environment of narcissism is
| hardly representative.
| prmoustache wrote:
| Even if the Gaza deal stick, I don't see how one could
| receive a nobel prize while deploying army and starting a war
| in their own country in cities/states/counties led by their
| political opponents.
| ungreased0675 wrote:
| Starting a war? Let's not get too wild with the hyperbole
| please.
| throwaway24740 wrote:
| Deploying military police or the military proper in cities
| is a common practice in other liberal nations, the USA is
| the exception.
| leosanchez wrote:
| I think he wants Noble prize for stopping 700 wars.
| alwinaugustin wrote:
| He will start his own prize now and award it for himself
| every year.
| ks2048 wrote:
| Well, he did claim to have solved the war between Albania
| and Azerbaijan - that alone is worthy of a prize.
| tim333 wrote:
| You have to admit there is almost no fighting between
| them now.
| crossroadsguy wrote:
| Huh. Obama was given in advance - _anticipatory_. Maybe as a
| moral loan and it is up for debates whether it was ever
| repaid.
| rhubarbtree wrote:
| Very debatable. His deal with Iran kept the peace though -
| trump ripping it up led to war.
|
| Ironically, trump may win the peace prize next year for
| ending a war he created. If indeed, against the odds, he
| has ended this war.
| throwaway24740 wrote:
| What war did Trump create?
| JimDugan wrote:
| >For ending a war he created.
|
| What war did Trump create that you claim he's ending?
|
| Because as far as I know, Israel's war on Gaza started
| before his term, and if the peace deal holds, Trump will
| be almost singlehandedly responsible for ending it.
|
| If that's not worthy of a Nobel Peace prize, I truly
| don't know what else is.
| C6JEsQeQa5fCjE wrote:
| > What war did Trump create that you claim he's ending?
|
| He allowed Israel to break the last ceasefire immediately
| after the first phase of prisoner exchange was over, and
| to subsequently act with more brutality than even before.
| He started that chapter himself, whether through
| psychopatic indifference, narcisstic business fantasy of
| a future riviera with his name, or being a completely
| weak man who couldn't say no. Whatever the reason, he
| started the next 7 months of slaughter.
| xdennis wrote:
| Hamas broke the ceasefire on Oct 7 and killed 1000+
| Israelis. Israel is justified in breaking every ceasefire
| with Hamas until the end of time. You should not
| negotiate in good faith with terrorists. There should be
| peace with the Palestinians, but not with Hamas.
| C6JEsQeQa5fCjE wrote:
| Hasbara bullet points with no effort. Logically falls
| apart upon the most basic of inspections. For example, if
| a one day attack justifies a disproportionate slaughter
| for 2 years, then what is a merely PROPORTIONATE response
| to 2 years of slaughter? What is a merely proportionate
| response to 85% of all buildings destroyed and all
| infrastruction being turned to rubble?
|
| For bystanders, be aware that there is a lot of money to
| be made by defending Israel. Some people will take that
| money. Just a few citations below:
|
| - Certain social media influencers being paid up to $7000
| per post [1]
|
| - Israel boosts propaganda funding by $150m to sway
| global opinion against genocide [2] [3]
|
| - "[...] a firm called Bridges Partners LLC has been
| hired to manage an influencer network under a project
| code-named the "Esther Project." " [4]
|
| [1] https://responsiblestatecraft.org/israel-influencers-
| netanya...
|
| [2] https://www.middleeasteye.net/live-blog/live-blog-
| update/isr...
|
| [3] https://jewishchronicle.timesofisrael.com/israel-has-
| spent-m...
|
| [4] https://www.jta.org/2025/09/30/united-states/israels-
| secret-...
| crossroadsguy wrote:
| Trump might win it anyway. If he stares at Norway long
| enough and his minions find a way to harass the country
| (which is the MO these days), I have a feeling Norway
| will find a way to give him one (or two if he fancies),
| just like they found ways to not give it to many
| deserving people throughout its history, just because
| nations with convincing physical _likeness_ would not
| have appreciated that.
| rhubarbtree wrote:
| I hope they've managed to convey this to the whitehouse.
|
| It really didn't help when they gave Obama the prize. Even he
| was embarrassed by it.
|
| I think trump genuinely deserves the prize if peace in the
| Middle East achieved. However, I think it's far more likely
| he's being played for a fool by Israel as per Russia.
|
| Trump does genuinely seem to want to avoid foreign wars, to
| his credit.
|
| Norway is no doubt now bracing itself for tariffs or other
| retaliation. Hopefully they can dangle next year's prize as
| worth waiting for.
| greggoB wrote:
| > Trump does genuinely seem to want to avoid foreign wars,
| to his credit.
|
| Just going to drop this here: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v
| =QQYFVEka3fA&pp=ygUYc2FyY2FzbWl...
| C6JEsQeQa5fCjE wrote:
| > I think trump genuinely deserves the prize if peace in
| the Middle East achieved
|
| The current ceasefire proposal doesn't address the wider
| struggle for liberation of the indigenous people of
| Palestine, and as such it cannot be anything more than a
| temporary stop to a 2-year genocide against them.
| Settlements are still being built and fences around
| Palestinian houses are still being erected in the West
| Bank. Ethnic Cleansing continues. There is no peace until
| Israel undergoes the same transformation that Apartheid
| South Africa did when it turned into just South Africa
| (which requires efforts from the entire world to boycott
| it).
| cosmicgadget wrote:
| Peace in the Middle East - er, Gaza - by supporting a
| military occupation.
|
| I'm not sure this is what Al Nobel has in mind.
| mtlmtlmtlmtl wrote:
| Nonsense, is it?
|
| https://x.com/StevenCheung47/status/1976601157041856756
| insane_dreamer wrote:
| > nobody, including Trump, would expect to be honored
|
| oh, he absolutely 100% would
| j4nitor wrote:
| I'm so happy as a Finn that we signed big icebreaker deal with
| Trump just before this.
|
| https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-finlands-stubb-expect...
| throw0101d wrote:
| This was initially worked up under Biden:
|
| * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICE_Pact
| WinstonSmith84 wrote:
| It was a MAGA talking point from the start, meant for MAGA
| ppl... The chance he got it was 0%, because:
|
| 1- The Nobel Peace Prize is chosen by a committee of 5
| Norwegians. Having Russia or Israel expressing support doesn't
| help, it's probably even counterproductive. Random endorsements
| on Twitter don't matter either..
|
| 2- The committee values international cooperation, not trade
| wars, isolationism, or cozying up to dictators.
|
| 3- They prize the defense of democracy, not attacks on it.
|
| 4- The cherry on the cake: Machado got the prize while he's
| been threatening war with Venezuela itself. It almost feels
| like a big f*ck off
| xorcist wrote:
| > Having Russia or Israel expressing support doesn't help,
|
| Please. At least get the facts right.
|
| It was not just Russia and Israel. It was _also_ Cambodia,
| Azerbaijan, Gabon _and_ Rwanda.
| chrneu wrote:
| it's not often Gabon shows up to the party. Lol
| crossroadsguy wrote:
| Also, the current military dictator of Pakistan, and maybe
| it was done as a state sponsorship, not just a personal
| one.
| NoGravitas wrote:
| Machado is manufacturing consent for Trump's planned
| invasion, so point 4 is a bit weaker than you might like.
| Imagine looKing at Iraq and saying "yeah, that's what I want
| for my country".
| onetimeusename wrote:
| Your last comment isn't very consistent. For one thing the US
| recognizes Edmundo Gonzalez as the rightful president[1].
| Machado helped him during the campaign last year. For
| another, Machado opposes Maduro's regime and she actually
| dedicated her prize to Trump.[2]
|
| [1]: https://www.state.gov/secretary-rubios-call-with-the-
| rightfu...
|
| [2]: https://x.com/MariaCorinaYA/status/1976642376119549990
| WinstonSmith84 wrote:
| Yes, she dedicated her prize to Trump, and that's easy to
| understand. It's a way to flatter his ego so that:
|
| 1- He doesn't turn against her or try to undermine her (he
| certainly would otherwise)
|
| 2- He publicly supports her cause.
|
| 3- His attention stays on Venezuela .. I really doubt she
| wants a full-scale US intervention.
| DrScientist wrote:
| > she actually dedicated her prize to Trump
|
| Indeed. Juan Guaido is yesterdays man.
|
| According to the New York Times...
|
| " She has expressed support for the use of force to depose
| the Maduro regime; one of her advisors told the New York
| Times that she has coordinated with the Trump
| administration and that she has a plan for the first
| hundred hours after his deposition"
|
| Not sure what democratic mandate she has to be in charge
| post a foreign led military coup - though she is a graduate
| of the Yale World Fellows programme.
|
| So rather than a big FU it would appear to be more likely
| to be an attempt to raise her profile to legitimise a US
| led coup.
| astrange wrote:
| Norwegians don't care about legitimizing US coups, and
| the current US administration is incapable of working
| with /anyone/ let anyone influencing Norway.
| thelastgallon wrote:
| Can't the baby get one for economics?
| GolfPopper wrote:
| That's not actually a Nobel Prize.
| knowriju wrote:
| Well instead of him directly, his deep state apparatus got it,
| so there is that.
| jjgreen wrote:
| I predict no more US oil for Norway ...
| palmfacehn wrote:
| Norway is a net exporter of petroleum.
|
| Here is a related tangent:
|
| >Norway walks back US Navy fuel supply boycott
|
| https://www.bairdmaritime.com/security/naval/naval-
| ships/nor...
| bratwurst3000 wrote:
| good one :) I read the irony ;)
| jjgreen wrote:
| Not all will ...
| insane_dreamer wrote:
| And we might just take Greenland from them in retribution!
|
| (oh wait, that's Denmark, but never mind, a certain president
| probably wouldn't know the difference; if some Fox News
| commentator said that Greenland belongs to Norway, he'd
| believe it).
| deadbabe wrote:
| Stop injecting that fool into every conversation, the world
| doesn't revolve around him. Discuss the recipient and her
| accomplishments.
| nothrowaways wrote:
| I also know someone who expects a peace prize after creating a
| department of war.
| deepsquirrelnet wrote:
| David Frum talked at length about self-abasement in MAGA
| public culture in his recent podcast for the Atlantic[1].
|
| > I think it also becomes a real test of in-group loyalty to
| see who can outcompete in slavishness the other members of
| the circle, who are also competing to be slavish. That's why
| you get these strange [phenomena] like Donald Trump's
| physicians claiming that he's the most physically vigorous
| president ever.
|
| > Now, even when Donald Trump was younger, he was a big man,
| but he was never a great athlete. And now, as he approaches
| his 80th birthday, he's obviously not physically fit.
|
| > The fact is, you're not just willing to tell a lie, but
| tell a lie that abases you, that makes you look foolish, that
| makes you look like you don't care about yourself at all,
| that you only defer to the leader. That's the real sign of
| loyalty. It's flattery that is not meant to be believed but
| functions as a kind of system of in-group recognition.
|
| To me, this is a perfect mirror to Chairman Mao (supposedly)
| swimming across the Yangtze River in his 70s at a pace faster
| than an Olympic champion of today.
|
| There's no meaning to any of it. It's just propaganda and
| self-abasement for the purpose of loyalty competition to the
| leader. In fact, the more ludicrous, the better, because it
| means you're willing to fully destroy any personal
| credibility you may have as a sacrifice to show loyalty.
|
| [1] https://www.theatlantic.com/podcasts/archive/2025/10/the-
| dav...
| cosmicgadget wrote:
| Whoa now. He does not create. He rebrands.
| pphysch wrote:
| The same big baby that is allied with Machado in destroying
| Venezuela's sovereignty?
| tim333 wrote:
| >The White House has denounced the Norwegian Nobel Committee's
| decision to award the Nobel peace prize to someone other than
| Donald Trump.
|
| https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/oct/10/trump-nobel-...
| duxup wrote:
| I think that whole discussion was aimed at people who know
| nothing about the Nobel Peace Prize ... but many of those would
| be his fans.
| amysox wrote:
| Expect a ketchupnado in the White House...
| stevefan1999 wrote:
| Looks like this would prompt Maduro to kill her, and gave US a
| reason to invade Venezula.
| goku12 wrote:
| Or someone else on his behalf - even his enemies.
|
| Alright, we are into conspiracy theory territory now. But let
| me just say that these awards make me a bit nervous.
| sien wrote:
| The US attacking Venezuela before 2026 is now at 31% on
| metaculus.
|
| https://www.metaculus.com/questions/39336/us-attacks-venezue...
| pjc50 wrote:
| Bit late for that, they've already murdered some random
| Venezuelans at sea.
| zamadatix wrote:
| I don't think that met either of the criteria:
|
| > This question will resolve as Yes if, before January 1,
| 2026, the United States carries out a military attack
| against Venezuela's territory or military forces.
| yohannesk wrote:
| As an Ethiopian man, I view this new Nobel Peace Prize with
| profound skepticism, a feeling rooted entirely in the disastrous
| outcome of Abiy Ahmed's utterly undeserved award. The premature
| praise he received for peace-making quickly evaporated, leading
| instead to a catastrophic war and the fragmentation of our
| nation. His prize has been followed by widespread conflict,
| massive displacement, and an alarming return to authoritarian
| rule. For us, the entire Nobel Peace Prize now feels meaningless,
| a hollow symbol given its failure to prevent--or perhaps its role
| in emboldening--such terrible suffering in Ethiopia
| yannickt wrote:
| For me, that skepticism began when Obama received the award. To
| his credit, he did not think he deserved it. But I have never
| viewed it in the same light since.
| BrenBarn wrote:
| I mean I think you can go back well before that. At least to
| when Kissinger received it, while his co-laureate Le Duc Tho
| refused it on the basis that no peace had been achieved.
| mw67 wrote:
| Barack Obama is the only two-term President in US history to
| be at war every day of his Presidency. The only one.
| Krssst wrote:
| The two first wars that come to mind were not started by
| him though.
| rob74 wrote:
| To his credit: he didn't _start_ any of those wars. But
| yes, I agree that the Nobel prize was unfounded.
| antonymoose wrote:
| He started a number of color revolutions though out MENA?
|
| And let us not forget his assassination of an American
| citizen by drone strike for visiting the place of his
| fathers death, also assassinated by drone strike.
|
| And if we want a "fun fact," he is the only Nobel Peace
| winner to bomb and kill another, as commander and chief
| his forces bombed and killed innocents in a Doctor's
| Without Borders outpost in Afghanistan.
| (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kunduz_hospital_airstrike)
| pjc50 wrote:
| I think there's a very high bar of proof to "Americans
| are responsible for a popular revolution" when in
| practice there was a huge amount of effort by individuals
| on the ground, for example in Tahrir Square.
|
| Obama did not make Mohamed Bouazizi set himself on fire.
| Cyph0n wrote:
| Can we please stop propagating the flimsy conspiracies
| about the 2011 revolutions? They started entirely
| organically, but some unfortunately devolved into wider
| conflicts.
|
| At worst, this conspiracy infantilizes Arab populations
| by removing their agency. At best, it's false marketing
| for the CIA and other agencies.
| crazybonkersai wrote:
| He surely started Libyan War by bombing the hell out the
| government forces and creating power vacuum. The war is
| still ravaging the country to this day
| netsharc wrote:
| You seem to have come from another timeline, where that's
| reality. Wikipedia says:
|
| > On 19 March 2011, a NATO-led coalition began a military
| intervention into the ongoing Libyan Civil War to
| implement United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973
| (UNSCR 1973). The UN Security Council passed the
| resolution with ten votes in favour and five abstentions,
| with the stated intent to have "an immediate ceasefire in
| Libya, including an end to the current attacks against
| civilians, which it said might constitute 'crimes against
| humanity'
|
| but I guess that's fake news...
|
| But I'm more interested about how you can travel between
| timelines. Is it with a portal gun like in Rick and
| Morty?
| pydry wrote:
| The UN mandate which NATO were given to use military
| force _only_ to protect civilians was used as a figleaf
| to pursue a regime change operation instead.
|
| In the context of that regime change operation they
| killed _many_ civilians and left a humanitarian
| catastrophe in their wake. The country is _beyond fucked_
| but Hillary did get to say "we came, we saw, he died"
| afterwards, underscoring the lie. So mission
| accomplished?
|
| For some reason the UN security council stopped approving
| NATO "humanitarian" operations after that and Russia
| started treating NATO expansion as an imperialist,
| existential threat.
| crazybonkersai wrote:
| What are you saying exactly? Military intervention is not
| a war? Obama did not play a decisive role in starting it
| (mainly to sway away attention from the dragging
| Afghanistan war which he promised to end)? Or UN mandate
| makes it somewhat ok, considering NATO broke conditions
| of the UN resolution already in the first weeks of
| bombing (which was promptly objected by UN security
| Council members). Make no mistake. Obama started this war
| for PR reasons. Had it not been for NATO bombing Libya
| would still exist as a state instead of a failed entity
| it is now.
| netsharc wrote:
| "ongoing Libyan Civil War".
|
| If I'm joining an ongoing party, did I start the party?
| crazybonkersai wrote:
| By this logic Russia did not start Ukraine war but merely
| joined the internal conflict started by Ukraine in 2014.
|
| It was hardly a civil war before NATO bombing, but rather
| protests which were brutally squashed by Gaddafi forces.
| Opposition lacked any means to wage a way before NATO
| started supplying them with arms too.
| netsharc wrote:
| So in the timeline you're from, the Crimean invasion also
| was an internal conflict... interesting!
|
| Also there, civilized societies should look away and just
| let it happen when people fighting oppression is being
| slaughtered. Well, that's quite similar to this timeline,
| because that's what's happening in Gaza and being ignored
| by "The West".
| crazybonkersai wrote:
| Well, oppression is exactly what people in Crimea and
| Donbass viewed Maidan events and did not want to have
| anything to do with this new Ukraine. Go do a research on
| Crimea referendum or gallups done by Pew or such and you
| will find out that secession was and still is the most
| popular option. And sure as hell people of Crimea do not
| want to be part of Ukraine again.
| cheema33 wrote:
| Did Obama start the Afghanistan war? or the Iraq war?
|
| Yes, he could exit those countries hastily. But that has
| its own cost. Getting in wars is the easy part. Getting out
| of one is the hard part. Ask Putin who went into Ukraine on
| a 3-day limited special military operation.
|
| Bush Jr. got us into multiple wars and unlike his father
| did not limit the scope of them. His father did get us into
| a war with Iraq but was smart enough to keep it limited in
| scope.
|
| Also, under Obama, the "wars" were not real wars like the
| Russia/Ukraine war where both sides are losing hundreds of
| people every week. But they were more like peacekeeping
| operations that occasionally ran into skirmishes.
| rob74 wrote:
| If you ask me, Putin is welcome to end the Ukraine war at
| any time he wants! Getting out of a war is actually easy
| _if_ you don 't care what happens after that, e.g. in the
| case of Afghanistan accept as "sunk costs" the billions
| of dollars and thousands of lives that were lost during
| the 20 years that NATO was involved there.
| benjiro wrote:
| > like the Russia/Ukraine war where both sides are losing
| hundreds of people every week.
|
| Every week? If we just look at the Russian casualties
| numbers, its around 1000+ casualties PER DAY.
|
| There was a recent leak of the death toll and the most
| active area's had a 2/5 dead rate, 1/3 "missing" rate,
| and the rest was wounded.
|
| If we only count the death + "missing" over the entire
| front for Russia, its 500+ PER DAY.
|
| Ironically, the Russian->Afghanistan invasion was WAY
| less deadly then what we see today in Ukraine.
|
| Your point still stands about the US evolvement in
| Iran/Afghanistan, but darn your numbers really way below
| the actual body count in the Russian "3-day limited
| special military operation". Those are numbers from the
| first year, not the daily of the third year.
| cheema33 wrote:
| > Every week? If we just look at the Russian casualties
| numbers, its around 1000+ casualties PER DAY.
|
| You are likely correct. I have heard of the high casualty
| estimates, but wanted to keep it conservative to not have
| someone complain about the estimate being too high.
| grafmax wrote:
| > more like peacekeeping operations
|
| Peacekeeping is like the UN sending troops in to monitor
| a ceasefire. These were wars. 35,000+ civilian deaths in
| Afghanistan. Overthrowing Gaddafi. Tens of thousands of
| airstrikes against ISIS in Iraq and Syria. Drone strikes
| killing thousands of civilians in Pakistan. US foreign
| policy has equated "peace" and "stability" with its own
| military hegemony, being almost constantly at war to
| further its hypocritical ideology. It's been a cash cow
| for the defense lobby.
| JacobThreeThree wrote:
| Obama was very explicitly promising to get out of the
| middle east wars.
|
| Of course it's hard, but if that's true, then why is he
| making those promises, or worse, why is he being given a
| peace award based on those promises?
| BolexNOLA wrote:
| Are we going to pretend that a president not keeping
| promises from the campaign trail is somehow exceptional?
| rzzzwilson wrote:
| Depends what you mean by "be at war". For example, the
| Russo-Ukraine war has been going since February 2014.
| Through both Trump presidencies.
| wilg wrote:
| Yeah two unpopular wars he did not start and spent a lot of
| effort figuring out how to get out of. He ended one and his
| vice president later ended the other.
| MomsAVoxell wrote:
| The notion that the Nobel prize is of any moral value,
| whatsoever, is faulty.
|
| The Nobel Foundation is an attempt to make amends for the
| harms done by its founders invention of explosive materials -
| which subsequently birthed the military-industrial complex.
|
| Its use of its material wealth to invest in index funds
| derives a great deal of wealth from weapons manufacturers
| such as Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and Raytheon Technologies ..
| In that sense, it has only been since 2017 that it has
| exclusively attempted to avoid profiting from investments in
| the Wests' military-industrial complex. However, there is a
| growing voice of discontent which claims that the
| Foundations' policy change to "avoid investing in
| controversial weapons systems" is a PR move, and not a real
| force for change.
| card_zero wrote:
| Don't you think making amends is of value, and should be
| encouraged?
| MomsAVoxell wrote:
| Awarding the "Peace Prize" to a US' President who went on
| to drop more bombs per minute on innocent human beings
| than his predecessor, _is not making amends_.
|
| No, I do not think that the Nobel Foundation is making
| amends. I think it is functioning as a propaganda tool of
| the very military-industrial complex from which it
| derived its wealth.
|
| Duplicity is not making amends.
| card_zero wrote:
| OK. I was looking narrowly at "The Nobel Foundation is an
| attempt to make amends for the harms done by its founders
| invention of explosive materials", but that was not in
| fact the issue.
| MomsAVoxell wrote:
| Any well-intended organisation can have its purpose
| subverted, easily enough.
|
| All it takes is for its capital investments to be handled
| by a third party.
| sschueller wrote:
| Henry Kissinger got it. He should have been tried at the
| Hague instead.
| jansan wrote:
| Unlike the other Nobel prizes, the peace prize does not seem
| to be given as a reward for past achievements, but as an
| encouragement to continue current political engagement.
| arp242 wrote:
| He won the award for his excellent ability of not being
| George W. Bush. In fairness, he really is quite good at this.
| I haven't really followed his career post-presidency, but
| reportedly he continues to not be George W. Bush to this day.
| NoGravitas wrote:
| The Nobel Peace prize has been a joke ever since it was
| awarded to Kissinger in 1973.
| pjc50 wrote:
| There's a long tradition of the Nobel Peace Prize being awarded
| to weirdly undeserving people, capped off by Henry Kissinger.
| peterfirefly wrote:
| Giving it to a crazy genocidal Communist like Le Duc Tho was
| worse.
| squigz wrote:
| I won't deny some of the recipients are questionable, but I
| don't see how someone receiving the award or not would help
| prevent - or embolden - suffering in a country? I'm not
| familiar with what happened in Ethiopia, so apologies if this
| is obvious.
| t0rt01se wrote:
| I apologise in advance for making light of the situation in
| your country, but did you find the peace awards more
| meaningless than Hinton's award for PHYSICS?!!
| arp242 wrote:
| It's probably best to see the prize more as encouragement
| rather than endorsement of everything the person has ever done.
| Abiy Ahmed won the award "for his efforts to achieve peace and
| international cooperation, and in particular for his decisive
| initiative to resolve the border conflict with neighbouring
| Eritrea". His actions in the last few years notwithstanding, he
| did do that. And insofar I can follow Ethiopian politics, his
| other actions from the early years were also generally in the
| spirit of the Nobel Peace Prize. At least in theory,
| celebrating and rewarding this kind of thing is good? I don't
| see how it would embolden him, or anyone else?
| NalNezumi wrote:
| There's a "curse" in Nobel peace prize for sure. Not long after
| Obama got it, he got US dragged in to Libya and Syria. Merely 2
| years after EU got it, Crimea was annexed during Ukraine trying
| to get closer to EU (and EU really did nothing about this).
|
| Not to the fault of the people per se, but I see too much
| "awarded for effort, then oops turns out the complete opposite
| happened" with the peace prize.
|
| Norwegians are known for their oil and salmon. not knowledge,
| but being spoiled. so maybe the committee are just painfully
| incompetent to the level we should now bet that Venezuela
| should expect big turmoil in the coming years
| ErneX wrote:
| She's been in hiding since the last elections that Maduro
| blatantly stole. I lost hope myself about Venezuela but I wish
| the regime ends soon for those still there enduring it.
| goku12 wrote:
| I understand your frustration. But you may want to avoid a
| foreign interference/invasion more than a bad regime. The
| former is arguably worse than the latter, though there are
| exceptions.
| ErneX wrote:
| It's been over 25 years since these thugs took power. I don't
| care if one country or a coalition of countries gets rid of
| them. I would actually welcome foreign intervention at this
| point.
| NoGravitas wrote:
| Imagine looking at Iraq and saying, "yeah, that's what I
| want for my country."
| ErneX wrote:
| There are many ways to intervene and pressure other than
| a full blown invasion.
| squigz wrote:
| I feel like "bad regime" is blatantly downplaying the
| seriousness of it.
| goku12 wrote:
| I'm not very familiar with the situation in Venezuela. But
| the 'bad regime' is just a generic phrase that was not
| intended to convey the seriousness in any sense. However,
| what I can claim is that you totally ignored the
| seriousness of a foreign interference and invasion. Yes - a
| dictatorship is not a good situation at all anywhere in the
| world. But what good is it for a nation if one horrible
| regime is to be replaced by another? Do you know how many
| atrocities western militaries have inflicted in countries
| that they invaded in the name of liberating them? Many of
| them compete with the local tyrants on how cruel they can
| get. You wont learn much about it because the western media
| doesn't seem to care. Ask the people of countries that
| suffered western military invasion instead. I'm not sure
| you realize how much people outside the west resent the
| 'services rendered' in their countries. It's a long running
| trope around the world that if there is a serious conflict
| in any part of the world, it's sure to have the hand of one
| of two western powers in it. Yet, the western population
| pat themselves in the back for the virtues of freedom and
| equality. There are even those who are still proud of their
| colonial past, believing that they enriched their colonies
| somehow. Meanwhile, don't forget the depth of xenophobia
| and racism of the current regime that's virtue signalling
| with the intent to invade Venezuela.
| aglavine wrote:
| No it isn't at all. Venezuela and South America need Foreign
| forces to stop the Venezuela cartel.
| goku12 wrote:
| Like Afghanistan? Or Germany after WWII? You talk of these
| 'Foreign forces' as some sort of benevolent power
| liberating people from tyranny for charity. Wait till they
| stay back to extract payment for their 'efforts'. We have
| watched decade and decades of this moral grandstanding
| destroy weaker nations. And need I remind you how much
| these 'foreign forces' are responsible for creating the
| hellish conditions in South America though their
| interference in the first place? It's just replacement of
| one tyrant with another. Another that brings in weapons and
| troops from outside the country.
| ErneX wrote:
| I fully understand what you mean.
|
| But just so you picture it: things are so dire there
| after 25 years that people would even cheer at any
| country intervening.
|
| So let's pause for a moment and think: what is the best
| alternative? Keep enduring the regime like the Cubans
| have been doing for double the time we have? That's also
| a depressing outlook.
| goku12 wrote:
| > That's also a depressing outlook.
|
| Of course it is. I'm not denying or downplaying how bad
| it is. These situations are scary as hell. They're not
| supposed to happen. And it must change. Venezuela
| deserves peace. But now imagine the alternative you're
| thinking of.
|
| To start with, who was responsible for the political
| turmoil in South America for much of its history? Imagine
| another invasion. Do you expect them to withdraw as soon
| as the current Venezuelan regime has fallen? The regime
| that's virtue signalling now has a history of proudly
| brandishing their xenophobia and racism. What do you
| think life will be like under a remote controlled rule by
| them? There are plenty of examples around the world for
| how that will end. Is that the change you wish for?
|
| > what is the best alternative?
|
| The best alternative is for the native population to
| bring about change without foreign interference. But
| honestly, I have no clue if that's practical at all. I
| don't know any other solutions either. The people must
| decide for themselves as to how to resolve this. All I'm
| saying is that you must be careful about the intentions
| of anyone who steps in offering help. I sincerely wish
| that the Venezuelans win peace. Good Luck!
| ErneX wrote:
| Thanks mate, that's what the people have been trying for
| many years but it's an uphill battle when they have the
| all the repressive means and the population does not.
| unsupp0rted wrote:
| Is the Nobel Peace Prize given to people who accomplished a lot
| as individuals (like Maria Corina Machado) or people who
| accomplished a lot at scale without doing much beyond a few phone
| calls and document-signings, like Trump?
|
| Because a few phone calls and document-signings can bring about
| many orders of magnitude more "peace units" in the world, if
| backed by the world's largest economy and the world's most
| effective military at projecting power.
| 9dev wrote:
| The Nobel _peace_ prize cannot be given to someone who rebrands
| the ministry of defence to the ministry of war and proclaims on
| a stage that he hates his enemies. These things are mutually
| exclusive.
| eru wrote:
| Why? Do they have rules against that?
| 9dev wrote:
| There doesn't need to be. Basic dignity and logical
| thinking tell you that an award for honest efforts to
| facilitate peace awarded to MLK and Mother Teresa cannot be
| awarded to someone like Donald Trump. And you see that
| obviously the Nobel committee shares this opinion, which is
| why he luckily did not receive it.
| ReptileMan wrote:
| Have you checked some of the winners? Arafat is there and
| so are Kissinger - the napalm sticks on kids guy and
| Obama - the guy that shot hospitals and weddings in
| Afghanistan. Trump will fit right in.
| eru wrote:
| To be fair, when Obama got the prize, he hadn't done any
| of that, yet, because he got it right away before he did
| anything.
| 9dev wrote:
| If I remember correctly, even the man himself later
| admitted to being thoroughly confused as to why he would
| get it.
| throw101010 wrote:
| And arguably it should not be given to someone who
| requests/asks/begs for it constantly and openly. It would
| brign about all sorts of bad incentives in something that
| should be a reward for good intentions and efforts.
| 9dev wrote:
| That, too, and heaps of reasons more.
| card_zero wrote:
| Go on ..? On the face of it, a prize for holding back
| from being an asshole seems like a good thing, and
| perhaps a more worthwhile incentive than a prize for
| saints who would have been extremely virtuous anyway.
| throw101010 wrote:
| Incentivizing foreign interventions in conflicts "just"
| to earn a prize and risking to aggravate a
| situation/conflict/war does not sound good at all to me.
|
| It's not about rewarding saints, it's about rewarding
| people who do genuine efforts to bring peace in this
| world.
|
| You wouldn't want to incentivize a reckless vigilante
| just because some of the times it might lead to a desired
| outcome, disregarding all the times they'd get it wrong
| and would cause injustices (leading to more chaos, and
| not peace) just in their selfish pursuit of accolades and
| prizes.
|
| Trump is openly mentioning that what he's doing right now
| is worth a prize, can't get closer to doing it "for the
| prize". He exaggerates all his accomplishment (no he did
| not end 7, 8, 9, etc. wars... barely even one).
|
| All of this is done/said for one purpose, and it's not
| actually peace. It's one thing you can't reproach to him,
| he is pretty transparent in his intent when you give him
| a microphone. Do you think he will lose sleep over the
| peace in the middle east failing (once again)... or do
| you think he will care more about not getting the prize
| he literally mentions every time he's questioned about a
| war?
| unsupp0rted wrote:
| Or to somebody who makes dynamite
| 9dev wrote:
| Which is why Nobel himself was never awarded the Peace
| Prize, rendering your entire comment useless?
| timeon wrote:
| Do you really think this was clever take?
| cheema33 wrote:
| Not only that. He has threatened to militarily invade
| countries like Canada and Greenland just because he wants
| what they have. He also asked his supporters to punch his
| critics in the face and offered to pay their legal fees.
| chrneu wrote:
| I mean, he's sending troops to domestic democrat cities
| because he watched a fox news segment that showed footage
| from 2020. .....
| parrellel wrote:
| I will admit I've had some fun pointing the Fox News
| crowd to live Oregon traffic cams.
| ksynwa wrote:
| But then how will the world learn of his peaceful ways by
| force?
| lkramer wrote:
| Isolated, I think his efforts in the middle east, particular
| around normalising Israel's relations with its neighbours
| (though I believe he did fuck up handling Iran because of his
| personal bias) could have let to a peace prize in a few years
| time (maybe a shared one) and certainly be more deserved than
| Obama's, however I agree with others that all his other
| actions, including threatening to invade allies, should
| disqualify him.
| weli wrote:
| Don't get me wrong. She has firmly opposed maduro and is a beacon
| of hope for many in Venezuela but she hasn't accomplished
| anything meaningful yet? She is just a career politician that
| just happens to be in the opposition of the venezuelan goverment
| when Maduro (a dictator) is in power. But she hasn't done
| anything extraordinary to merit the award.
| ErneX wrote:
| Being the opposition leader there is already something
| extraordinary. While other opposition figures have ended up
| coziying up with the regime she hasn't relented. All while
| important members of her party have been imprisoned or
| murdered.
|
| She's also in hiding since the last elections, likely on an
| embassy but undetermined.
| alejoar wrote:
| Opposing a dictatorship at great personal risk, being exiled,
| banned from elections, and still leading a democratic movement
| isn't "nothing".
|
| I think this prize recognizes her courage and fight for human
| rights.
|
| Dismissing that as "just being in the opposition" ignores the
| reality of what it takes to stand up to Maduro's dictatorship.
| catlikesshrimp wrote:
| Moreover, she had been doing that for over 20 years. I am
| surprised by all her determination, her courage, and her luck
| to still be alive.
| croes wrote:
| Then the dictatorship can't be as bad as Russia for
| instance.The opposition dies pretty quickly there. Or fell
| out of windows.
| ErneX wrote:
| You think that doesn't happen in Venezuela?
|
| https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/09/fernando-
| alban...
| catlikesshrimp wrote:
| I suppose Venezuela has hope because it is a weak country
| with nominal US pressure agaisnt the current regime.
| Russia is self sufficient and has WMD (nuclear)
|
| On top of that, if I am not mistaken, Russia doesn't know
| what Democracy is. (Yeltsin and Medvedev up for
| discussion) As a result, for starters, Maduro can't make
| radical changes in the army.
| croes wrote:
| >As a result, for starters, Maduro can't make radical
| changes in the army.
|
| So it isn't as bad as Russia. Putin hasn't such
| boundaries.
| beernet wrote:
| Exactly this. This dismissal itself is a large part of the
| problem. The audacity, wow.
| weli wrote:
| I'm not saying that she isn't a good politician or that what
| she is doing is not a step in the right direction. I
| personally like her. All I'm saying is that she hasn't
| accomplished anything meaningful to merit the Nobel prize.
|
| That's like giving the Nobel in physics to someone that has
| worked all their life publishing papers but they all have
| been refuted and proven wrong.
|
| I don't think "prize" for the merit of being relentless in
| their fight for publishing physics papers is merited, maybe a
| different honor, but Peace Nobels should be given to - and i
| quote -:
|
| "to the person who shall have done the most or the best work
| for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or
| reduction of standing armies and for the holding and
| promotion of peace congresses."
| bratwurst3000 wrote:
| if you fight for justice peace and humanity the fight is
| the thing acomplished.
|
| standing up and risking their lives for the good of
| humanity merrits more then a nobel price can give!
| vasco wrote:
| Can you list which of the recent nobel peace prizes were
| attributed according to your standards?
| weli wrote:
| They are not my standards. They are the Nobel Peace
| committee's standards. And I do agree Nobel Peace prizes
| are purely performative, but this one alongside Barack
| Obama has been one of the most performative ones I can
| remember.
| CaptainOfCoit wrote:
| > They are the Nobel Peace committee's standards
|
| I think they're older than that, Nobel apparently left a
| will that included three conditions for what we today
| call the Nobel Peace Prize:
|
| > and one part to the person who has done the most or
| best to advance fellowship among nations, the abolition
| or reduction of standing armies, and the establishment
| and promotion of peace congresses.
|
| https://www.nobelprize.org/alfred-nobel/full-text-of-
| alfred-...
| palata wrote:
| > They are not my standards. They are the Nobel Peace
| committee's standards.
|
| So you're saying that the Nobel Peace committee has not
| been following their standards? I find this pretty hard
| to prove... it's like if you were telling me that even if
| I say that my favourite color is green, it probably isn't
| because green is not that special a colour.
| therealpygon wrote:
| If it is their own standards, then aren't they implicitly
| in the better position to make those judgements than you?
| kelipso wrote:
| Why would they be? They are just regular people who can
| make mistakes like everyone else. Don't tell me Obama
| implicitly deserved it lol.
| CaptainOfCoit wrote:
| > All I'm saying is that she hasn't accomplished anything
| meaningful to merit the Nobel prize
|
| I know it's frowned upon, but did you actually read the
| submission article? They're highlighting exactly why
| they've chosen her, including what meaningful work she has
| already done:
|
| > The efforts of the collective opposition, both before and
| during the election, were innovative and brave, peaceful
| and democratic. The opposition received international
| support when its leaders publicised the vote counts that
| had been collected from the country's election districts,
| showing that the opposition had won by a clear margin. But
| the regime refused to accept the election result, and clung
| to power.
|
| Maybe you have some better suggestions on who this award
| should have gone to? Of all the candidates, I guess in the
| end she was seen as having done a lot, but in your mind
| she've done nothing, which means you're thinking about some
| other person who did more?
| weli wrote:
| > Maybe you have some better suggestions on who this
| award should have gone to? Of all the candidates, I guess
| in the end she was seen as having done a lot, but in your
| mind she've done nothing, which means you're thinking
| about some other person who did more?
|
| I think if there are no suitable candidates the award
| should be skipped. Like it has been skipped many years
| for the same reasons. This would send a more powerful
| message about how fucked up the state of the world is
| rather than giving it to someone just for the sake of it.
| CaptainOfCoit wrote:
| So the conditions from the will are these:
|
| > and one part to the person who has done the most or
| best to advance fellowship among nations, the abolition
| or reduction of standing armies, and the establishment
| and promotion of peace congresses
|
| Go to her Wikipedia article, do a quick skim/read and
| then tell me how she doesn't fit with those conditions
| already?
|
| Why skip the prize when there are individuals that fit
| the conditions for the prize? Working for democracy and
| peace in a peaceful and democratic manner shouldn't be
| rewarded?
| js8 wrote:
| What is Maria Corina Machado doing is certainly
| impressive, and worth a reward. That being said.. (based
| on Wikipedia information about her)
|
| I don't see how wishing a foreign country to militarily
| overthrow a regime in your country promotes peace.
|
| If we also include democracy to that umbrella, I don't
| see how support of privatization of natural resources can
| be considered promotion of democracy.
|
| She's probably not as bad as Milei but.. I would not rule
| out a similar outcome.
| ErneX wrote:
| This award gives us hope and recognition as a country
| struggling to get rid of a dictatorship.
|
| Every Venezuelan that aspires freedom should be proud
| today.
| Al-Khwarizmi wrote:
| Not to diminish her valor and heroism. Mad respect. But how
| is that actually about peace?
|
| A dictatorship can be peaceful, and a democracy can be
| warlike. Venezuela hasn't been involved in any war recently
| as far as I know. Of course people who fight for democracy
| deserve being praised and supported, but to me it looks odd
| to do so with a _peace_ prize.
|
| The prize is supposed to be awarded to people who have "done
| the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for
| the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the
| holding and promotion of peace congresses". Is this the case
| here?
| CaptainOfCoit wrote:
| There is something called "democratic peace theory" which
| argues that democracies are less likely to attack other
| democracies, compared to other forms.
|
| So I guess you could also claim that democracy helps
| maintain peace from that point of view, and a person who
| successfully proved that a "democratic election" really
| wasn't democratic at all feels like the right thing to
| award, as it'll further international peace.
|
| edit: the submission article also talks briefly about how
| peace and democracy is linked (in their eyes):
|
| > Democracy is a precondition for lasting peace. However,
| we live in a world where democracy is in retreat, where
| more and more authoritarian regimes are challenging norms
| and resorting to violence. The Venezuelan regime's rigid
| hold on power and its repression of the population are not
| unique in the world. We see the same trends globally: rule
| of law abused by those in control, free media silenced,
| critics imprisoned, and societies pushed towards
| authoritarian rule and militarisation. In 2024, more
| elections were held than ever before, but fewer and fewer
| are free and fair.
| dormento wrote:
| > Democracy is a precondition for lasting peace
|
| Op's comment was about how this is not a given. Though
| tbf I can't recall any "peaceful" dictatorships, while I
| can recall a few war-happy democracies.
| wsintra2022 wrote:
| Maybe you'd of been satisfied if Dum'old Trump won it?
| snowwrestler wrote:
| A dictatorship cannot be peaceful. Peace is not merely "the
| absence of international war." Peace is rooted in
| individual rights and freedoms.
|
| If you walk around all day on metaphorical eggshells,
| surrounded by armed people who will beat you, torture you,
| disappear you, kill you and your family if you say the
| wrong thing, that is not a peaceful existence!
| GLdRH wrote:
| That's moving the goalposts.
| mtlmtlmtlmtl wrote:
| >Venezuela hasn't been involved in any war recently, as far
| as I know.
|
| While the point you're trying to make may or may not be
| valid, Venezuela is not a good example. Go read up on the
| Venezuela-Guyana crisis. The Maduro regime has been pushing
| the region closer to war in recent years. Renewing its
| claims to Guyanan territory, and preparing its military for
| war. For now, all out invasion has been prevented partially
| by significant support for Guyana and pressure against
| Venezuela from neighbouring countries and the west, and
| distraction from its own internal problems.
| ErneX wrote:
| Then I would argue that the current regime is at war with
| its own population.
| mc32 wrote:
| Is there a civil war with guerrilla warfare? Or do you
| mean figuratively at war like the war on drugs?
| ErneX wrote:
| The regime has been constantly committing crimes against
| the humanity. They created an 8 million people exodus.
|
| They kidnap, torture and kill political prisoners.
|
| Deployed the national guard on the favelas to kill
| indiscriminately thousands without a fair trial.
|
| You can Google all the UN reports on these matters.
| mc32 wrote:
| It sounds like repression --which if extreme enough
| approaches (civil) war. I'll give you that but then we'd
| include Cuba, North Korea and a few other countries as
| well.
| ErneX wrote:
| Every country should be rooting for our situation to be
| solved. We have way too many people abroad enduring bad
| situations that would be better back at home with a
| decent government and democracy restored.
|
| There are people that have WALKED all over the continent
| to flee, all the way to the US and Canada or Argentina,
| Chile, etc.
| Yokolos wrote:
| Sure. Now name people who are more deserving of the Nobel
| peace prize as this woman and explain their
| accomplishments and why it should make them a better
| pick. I'll wait.
|
| I don't really understand what you're arguing for or
| against. That this woman doesn't deserve the prize
| because there are places worse than Venezuela? What does
| that have to do with the Nobel peace prize? This isn't a
| "pick the worst place on earth" contest.
|
| I honestly don't understand any of the complaints in
| these comments. Is it because she's a woman? Or what?
| I've not seen anybody make any substantial arguments as
| to why she shouldn't be eligible.
| lostdog wrote:
| If someone was working to bring elections to North Korea,
| then they too would deserve a Nobel.
| tshaddox wrote:
| I mean sure. Winning a war is also sometimes seemingly
| necessary to achieve peace. And violence is sometimes
| seemingly necessary to replace a dictatorship with
| democracy. In this case, it looks like they're awarding her
| the prize for her efforts to peacefully oppose
| dictatorship.
|
| > The prize is supposed to be awarded to people who have
| "done the most or the best work for fraternity between
| nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies
| and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses".
|
| That's the one-liner from Nobel's will. It obviously leaves
| a lot of room for interpretation, and historically has
| often been awarded for civil rights advocacy.
| k3vinw wrote:
| That personal risk includes having yourself or loved ones
| thrown in prison without any contact to the outside world for
| however long the dictatorship sees fit.
|
| It's a very sad history of oppression and corruption that has
| forced many Venezuelans to pull up their roots and risk their
| lives leaving their own country. It would be a dream come
| true to see this dictatorship overthrown and replaced by a
| democratic system of government that serves the people.
| mananoreboton wrote:
| Don't get me wrong, but perhaps what was missing was greater
| media coverage and genuine interest in Venezuela's situation.
| Maria Corina Machado orchestrated a HUGE covert months long
| operation to collect tally sheets from the overwhelming
| majority of voting machines during the 2024 presidential
| election. Her team trained poll watchers to demand vote
| receipts (as legally permitted) then capture and transmit that
| data through various channels, even from the most remote
| regions of the country. There are documented cases of people--
| poll workers and participants in the plan--being imprisoned or
| even killed for their involvement. Thanks to this operation,
| the website resultadospresidencialesvenezuela2024.com exists,
| where venezuelan can verify the actual vote count per
| candidate, backed by fingerprint records and the serial numbers
| of both the software and hardware used. These verified results
| confirm that Edmundo Gonzalez was the true winner of the
| election. The data provides undeniable evidence that Nicolas
| Maduro installed himself as a dictator, with the full support
| of the national electoral authority, which, to this day, has
| refused to release the official election results (a procedure
| that has historically been routine).
|
| You can also verify the results here
| https://macedoniadelnorte.com/ (a whole story behind this
| hostname). Again, only possible by the Maria Corina's huge
| effort
| croes wrote:
| Sounds more like a Pulitzer than Nobel Peace Price.
|
| On the other hand, Gore got one for less.
| vasco wrote:
| It's a better recipient than pretty much all of the recent
| previous ones, definitely better than all the presidents.
| JohnLocke4 wrote:
| There is even a Wikipedia section for it: https://en.wikipe
| dia.org/wiki/Nobel_Prize_controversies#Peac...
| andrepd wrote:
| Well Kissinger got one, so by that logic the bar is set as
| low as it can be.
| NaomiLehman wrote:
| If Kissinger got one, maybe BB Netanyahu or Trump can get
| them too :D
| thisislife2 wrote:
| Next year. Assured. It maybe a trio including Tony Blair
| too - https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cq5j989107lo .
| LightBug1 wrote:
| Imagine them being awarded the prize for a war they could
| have stopped from the beginning. What a travesty that
| would be.
|
| A little premature, anyway. Let's get through 24 hours of
| a ceasefire first. That'd be an achievement these days
| ...
| croes wrote:
| I think the method should also been taken in to
| consideration.
|
| >Every Country has signed on! If this LAST CHANCE
| agreement is not reached, all HELL, like no one has ever
| seen before, will break out against Hamas.
|
| That's not negotiating.
| zelphirkalt wrote:
| But in that case let's do a rename! Nobel War Prize! That
| would also fit the ministry of war more.
| thisislife2 wrote:
| Sounds right from the playbook of the superpowers, when an
| oil rich country has a government that doesn't allow them to
| profit from their oil resources - (1) demonize the current
| leader and government, (2) Give international publicity and
| recognition to a politician ideologically friendly to them
| (3) Destabilise the unfriendly government by launching an
| internal / external war against them (4) Install the friendly
| puppet politician as the leader of the country (while
| shouting "democracy has won", if you are western superpower)
| (5) Profit!
| ch4s3 wrote:
| This comment reads as deeply ignorant and callous toward
| the treatment of the Venezuelan people by their government.
| Fully 1/3 of Venezuelans have fled the country due to
| repression and economic decline due to Maduro's
| mismanagement. As someone who reads Spanish I can tell you
| the the media in non US aligned Latin American countries is
| regularly reporting on the dictatorship in Venezuela.
|
| Not everything is about oils or some conspiracy of western
| governments.
| ErneX wrote:
| And what's funny is that I'm even willing to trade oil
| deals if someone gets rid of the murderer kleptocracy
| that stole Venezuela from us. So yeah let's do some oil
| deals if you help us get back to democracy.
| js8 wrote:
| Will you still have democracy once Corina Machado
| realizes her plan to privatize oil companies?
|
| I have little doubt she did a lot of good practical work
| for Venezuelan democracy (to expose Maduro's government).
| But her ideology - accept foreign invasion (which will
| inevitably kill innocent venezuelans) and privatizing oil
| reserves (which will inevitably result in undemocratic
| fallout of the profits) - is unfortunately not that of
| peace and democracy.
|
| I wish she would more look at Norway as an example, which
| is a rare case of oil profits being shared collectively
| and democratically.
| ErneX wrote:
| I'm not advocating for an invasion don't get me wrong.
|
| Venezuela had the biggest oil earnings of its history
| during the early Chavez years and all that money was
| pilfered. The oil industry infrastructure, the electric
| infrastructure is currently in shambles due to lack of
| investment, maintenance and corruption. Part of the
| recovery of Venezuela will require external investments
| just to get production back to the levels we had before
| this calamity.
|
| They also took massive loans in exchange for future oil
| at insane prices, when people argues that we are going to
| lose our oil if X or Y happens to me it doesn't mean
| anything, because we already lost it with these inept
| criminals in the government anyway.
|
| Edit: even Maduro is now offering our country's riches to
| the US in exchange for remaining in power:
|
| https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/10/world/americas/maduro-
| ven...
| ch4s3 wrote:
| > Will you still have democracy once Corina Machado
| realizes her plan to privatize oil companies?
|
| Yes. Norway is basically the only real democracy with a
| nationalized oil firm, and they found oil after having
| been a democracy for like 100 years. Everywhere else
| state oil companies are piggy banks for tyrants and
| prevent the country from investing in economic
| development because they don't need private tax revenues.
| State oil companies are a trap.
| somenameforme wrote:
| You're creating a false dichotomy. It is true that
| Venezuela is very poorly governed, and it's also that the
| the US is doing everything they can to prevent Venezuela
| from monetizing their natural resources, oil in
| particular, in order to try to inflict economic suffering
| on the common people. This is the whole sadistic, and
| nonsensical, point of sanctions - inflict suffering on
| common people in hopes they'll blame their government
| instead of people inflicting suffering on them, overthrow
| their government, and then align themselves with the
| people inflicting suffering on them.
|
| Without US sanctions Venezuela, and Venezuelans, would be
| in a _dramatically_ better place today.
| ErneX wrote:
| The countless human rights violations, stealing elections
| etc. predate the sanctions. This honestly feels like
| patronizing. Look up the UN reports of all the human
| rights violations happened over the last couple of
| decades there.
| diego_moita wrote:
| > Without US sanctions Venezuela, and Venezuelans, would
| be in a dramatically better place today.
|
| No. They wouldn't. The Venezuelan government has proven
| extremely incompetent to produce oil.
|
| What the Trump's tariffs have shown to the world is that,
| in the scale globalization is today, trade with the US
| doesn't matter that much anymore. Case in point: Brazil.
| After Trump stuck 50% tariffs on them, their exports to
| other countries grew much more than enough to offset the
| loss to the U.S.
|
| The US embargo on Venezuela is a lot like its embargo in
| Cuba, Iran and North Korea: it is not the cause of people
| suffering but is an excuse by those corrupt and
| incompetent regimes to hide their failures.
| lentil_soup wrote:
| Don't think you know what you're talking about. The
| sanctions to the country came way after the economic,
| social and political chaos.
| somenameforme wrote:
| Wiki conveniently has a nice graph demonstrating the real
| GDP/capita in Venezuela [1], which is reasonably
| reflective of the economic crisis. In 1980 it was around
| $16,000. By ~2013-2014 it had peaked a bit higher than
| $18,000 and had risen dramatically faster than the
| average for Latin America.
|
| In 2014 there were mass protests against the government,
| in reality it was an attempt to overthrow the government,
| which was responded to with brutality. That brutality was
| met with sanctions. Today their GDP/capita is about
| $5000. That's obviously going to be explained in part by
| the decline in oil prices around the same time, but not
| to that degree, to say the least.
|
| * - As an addendum here it's also unclear to me how
| exactly Wiki is calculating that figure and whether it
| accounts for, in any way, the substantial scale of
| emigration from Venezuela. If not, then the relative
| decline is even larger than it sounds.
|
| [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisis_in_Venezuela#/
| media/Fil...
| lentil_soup wrote:
| No, those sanctions were on very specific people, not
| companies or industries. Those came later in 2019 https:/
| /en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctions_during_the_Venezuela...
| somenameforme wrote:
| Not quite. A useful term related to sanctions is
| overcompliance. You can read the exact verbiage of some
| of the earliest sanctions here. [1] In a nutshell
| engaging in any form of trade (including transfer of
| expertise or whatever else) that directly or _indirectly_
| benefited a sanctioned person could trigger extremely
| harsh penalties.
|
| Many government officials in Venezuela have direct
| involvement with various industries, including oil. So it
| suddenly becomes this extremely complex and dangerous
| mess when doing any trade whatsoever with Venezuela. This
| is why their economy completely collapsed following the
| sanctions.
|
| [1] - https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2015/03/1
| 1/2015-05...
| ErneX wrote:
| Our collapse predates the sanctions.
|
| Also, Maduro is willing to trade our natural resources if
| it gets him more years in power:
|
| https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/10/world/americas/maduro-
| ven...
| somenameforme wrote:
| Absolutely, which makes this whole thread all the more
| absurd, or at least typical. It seems increasingly likely
| we'll get a war in Venezuela, likely supported by this
| Nobel Peace Prize winner, with the goal of installing her
| in power. It seems Guaido is out of fashion? Anyhow, if
| "we" win, and she gets installed, you know the first
| thing she's going to do? Trade access to your natural
| resources for wealth and power. They're the only reason
| the US is there. And then in a decade you'll be ranting
| against her.
|
| Look at the history of people the US sponsors in regime
| change operations around the world, and how things turn
| out. So long as they're loyal to the US, first and
| foremost, anything goes. Carlos Castillo Armas, Fulgencio
| Batista, Humberto Castelo Blanco, Augusto Pinochet,
| Efrain Rios Montt and many more though I'm limiting
| myself to the Americas. Of course I can fully understand
| the perspective that 'anything must be better than this
| shit show.' But it often turns out, in hindsight, that
| that's not exactly the case.
|
| And in general this is a big part of the reason that I'm
| highly opposed to the US meddling in countries around the
| world. There's always such a heavy price to pay in
| American dollars and the blood of others. And.. for what?
| Yeah yeah, this time it's different...
| thisislife2 wrote:
| And look, what a coincidence that this so called neo-
| liberal "opposition" leader of Venezuela plans to
| _privatise_ her countries oil companies (and other
| industries) again, and return it to their original owners
| (again, just another remarkable co-incidence that her
| father was the President of such a private company that
| was nationalised):
|
| > Machado defines herself -- and her party, Vente
| Venezuela -- as "liberal" (or neoliberal, depending on
| how you look at it), both politically and economically.
| Her political vision revolves around reducing the size of
| the state as a provider of public policies, supporting
| entrepreneurship and promoting the free market, as a
| means of creating wealth and jobs in a devastated
| economy. Her vision of government is similar to what
| Margaret Thatcher or Ronald Reagan had in mind ... The
| presidential candidate has proposed privatizing the
| state-owned oil company, Petroleos de Venezuela (PDVSA)
| -- a taboo in local politics -- and returning all the
| companies that have been expropriated by the Chavista
| regime to their rightful owners. This also includes
| Siderurgica Venezolana -- a company that her father (who
| died this year) was the president of, before it was
| seized ... Her vision on the distribution of social funds
| is somewhat more American than European, as is her deeply
| anti-communist discourse.
|
| Source: https://english.elpais.com/international/2023-10-
| 01/maria-co...
| ch4s3 wrote:
| > and it's also that the the US is doing everything they
| can to prevent Venezuela from monetizing their natural
| resources, oil in particular
|
| This is not at all true. A large share of Venezuelan oil
| is refined in Texas by Citgo for PDVSA. The US could
| easily stop that but doesn't. The sanctions are on regime
| ghouls, the military, and some state companies run by the
| security apparatus. None of which existed before the 3rd
| time the Chavistas stole an election and jailed their
| opposition.
| thisislife2 wrote:
| Sure, I am maybe ignorant about local Venezuelan
| politics, but I am quite tuned to what is happening to it
| internationally. And I can confidently state that _Trump
| or the US don 't have the best interests of Venezuela_
| when it tries to bring "democracy" there through war
| (internal or external). We all know that it is rubbish to
| call Venezuela a "narco-state". And we all know how much
| the Trump administration truly cares about "democracy",
| whether in the US or in Venezuela. The simple fact is
| that, along with Cuba, Venezuela remains a persistent
| thorn for the Americans in South America (their
| "backyard") because of their inability to dominate them
| politically. To make matters worse (for Venezuela),
| _Venezuela has the world 's largest proven reserves -
| roughly 18% of the global total_ - in the vast Orinoco
| Belt. (That's more than Saudi Arabia and Canada, though
| Venezuelan crude is harder to process). Russia and China
| have invested in Venezuelan oil industry and that has
| further rattled the US as it brings both the Russians and
| the Chinese to their "backyard".
|
| (I'll believe the west's "concerns" on Venezuela's
| "democracy" and "human rights" when they overthrow the
| dictators in Saudi Arabia, Qatar and UAE - where western
| companies are allowed to profit from oil resources in
| these regions - and bring "democracy" there).
|
| You may also want to educate yourself on the real reason
| for the Gaza Genocide and why Trump and Tony Blair (
| https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cq5j989107lo ) now plan
| to "directly administrate" Gaza - (1)
| https://asiatimes.com/2025/02/trumps-gaza-takeover-all-
| about... (2) https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/war-
| gaza-israel-brutal... ... As always, the sudden interest
| by the ex-colonials to bring "democracy" in Palestine is
| also about oil and gas.
| ErneX wrote:
| Don't make everything about yourself. We are in a big
| trouble just as it is and we could use all the help we
| can, even from the US regardless of who is at WH at the
| moment.
| firekvz wrote:
| Imagine telling venezuelans living in venezuela, to go
| educate themselves about venezuela
|
| Sire thing your links will be right and all my years
| suffering here are BS
| ch4s3 wrote:
| > Sure, I am maybe ignorant about local Venezuelan
| politics
|
| You should have stopped right there.
|
| The reason western countries care about Venezuela's
| democracy is twofold it was prior to the Chavez coup the
| oldest democracy in South America, and Maduro helps other
| anti-democratic leaders in Latin America rig elections
| and suppress opposition. He's a regional destabilizing
| force.
|
| If you think this is about oil it shows how little you
| know, please read a bit more before spouting off here,
| this isn't Reddit.
| aylmao wrote:
| > due to repression and economic decline due to Maduro's
| mismanagement
|
| Let's be real, sanctions play a big role in the economic
| decline of Venezuela.
|
| Saudi Arabia isn't a democracy. In fact, it's a very
| problematic totalitarian regime, where women have limited
| rights and the royalty has been known to kill enemies.
| They very much mismanage money, with ridiculous projects,
| ostentatious lifestyles if you're royalty or the elite,
| and have the "highest prevalence of modern slavery of all
| countries in the Arab States region" [1].
|
| Saudi Arabia is doing well economically though because it
| isn't sanctioned by the USA, and you don't hear bad press
| about it's totalitarian regime, or corruption, etc.
| because it's a USA ally.
|
| If the USA cared about how people are treated by their
| government, they'd be in Sudan or Congo. The USA cares
| about getting rid of Maduro, so they will make it as
| difficult as possible for the Venezuelan regime to make
| money from its oil, while pointing out all that's wrong
| and blaming Maduro for everything.
|
| I'm not saying things are well in Venezuela, or that
| Maduro is a good leader. I'm saying this is all part of a
| playbook that's been successful before, and it's
| reductionist to not blame the USA for Venezuela's
| decline.
|
| [1]: https://www.walkfree.org/global-slavery-
| index/country-studie...
| ch4s3 wrote:
| Sanctions are absolutely not the reason for economic
| decline. Chavez installed cronies into the national oil
| company who ran it into the ground, and Maduro spent the
| everything they had on the security state. Both
| successive regimes have made private industry nearly
| impossible.
| kranke155 wrote:
| Stunning. For making people realise this alone she deserved
| the prize.
| wyldfire wrote:
| This episode of TAL discussed vote tracking in Venezuela,
| might be interesting to HN folks.
|
| https://www.thisamericanlife.org/848/the-official-
| unofficial...
| NoahZuniga wrote:
| I was surprised to see https://macedoniadelnorte.com/ shows
| maduro as getting 30% of the vote.
| WorldPeas wrote:
| Any explanation on why the site is named that way?
| Venezuela seems a far way off from "North Macedonia"
| af78 wrote:
| In a dictatorship, running against the leader involves more
| personal risk than in a country that is already democratic.
| Also, democracies tend to be more peaceful than dictatorships;
| my understanding is that efforts to transition from
| dictatorship to democracy may be regarded as a contribution to
| peace.
|
| She also received the Sakharov Prize not long ago; if she had
| to receive only one, the latter would be easier to explain.
| KingMob wrote:
| That reminds me a bit of former winner Aung San Suu Kyi, who
| got the prize in 1991, while not having done or said that much
| at the time of the award, other than be a political prisoner.
|
| I respect that she opposed the Burmese military junta most of
| her life, but then a year after coming to power in 2015, she
| defended the military against charges of complicity in the
| Rohingya genocide to preserve her fragile government.
|
| Personally, I think the Peace Prize shouldn't go to politicians
| at all.
| SanjayMehta wrote:
| Aung San Suu Kyi was just another "compliant native" similar
| to those the British installed prior to leaving the colonies.
|
| The roadmap was laid out by Cecil Rhodes in his letters and
| will and extensively documented in "The Secret Society" by
| Robin Brown.
|
| It's quite fascinating to see their networks with the benefit
| of hindsight. For example, Mountbatten installed Nehru as the
| first unelected PM of India.
|
| Aung San Suu Kyi was educated in New Delhi India and during
| that time, she lived in Nehru's home.
| selimthegrim wrote:
| Was Sardar Patel or Maulana Azad taking their orders too?
| SanjayMehta wrote:
| Patel was under the thumb of Gandhi.
|
| Gandhi is the one who made Patel step aside in favour of
| Nehru, despite the latter losing the April 1946 election
| for the role Congress president; the understanding with
| the British was that the President of the Congress would
| be the first PM.
|
| Gandhi had a history of appeasement and compliance (see
| "The South African Gandhi" by Vahed and Desai) to the
| British, so Patel could be considered compromised
| indirectly. Personally I don't believe Patel was a
| stooge, just a victim of the personality cult around
| Gandhi.
|
| As for "Azad" - real name Abul Kalam Ghulam Muhiyuddin -
| I have not looked into his history.
| prashantsengar wrote:
| Calling Nehru "installed" by Mountbatten misses the crucial
| context of the time. Nehru was the undisputed leader of the
| Indian National Congress, which had been the primary force
| behind the independence movement for decades and had
| overwhelming popular support. Mountbatten's appointment was
| more of a constitutional formality in the transfer of
| power, not an act of kingmaking. It's like saying the Chief
| Justice "installs" a newly elected president.
|
| The same goes for the Aung San Suu Kyi connection. Labeling
| her a "compliant native" seems to ignore the 15 years she
| spent under house arrest actively fighting against a
| military junta. That's a pretty high price to pay for being
| a supposed puppet.
| arrrg wrote:
| The peace prize is often given to people still working on
| something, not having achieved something. In that way it is
| different from the science prizes.
|
| I think that is a understandable approach (providing support),
| though it can lead to giving the prize to people who never
| achieve any of their goals. Whether that's a worthy trade off I
| do not know.
| conradfr wrote:
| How much had Obama done in 2009? Maybe they forgot the
| criticism from back then.
| idoubtit wrote:
| We can only hope that she will not behave like the previous
| career politicians that got the Nobel Peace Prize in recent
| years.
|
| Abiy Ahmed (2019), from Ethiopia, ended the cold war with
| Eritrea. Then he launched a war against the region of Tigray,
| with mass rapes and mass civilian killings. He harassed the
| free press, and turned the country into an autocracy.
|
| Juan Manuel Santos (2016) from Colombia and Ellen Johnson
| Sirleaf (2011) from Liberia later appeared in Paradise Papers
| because they had secret offshore companies in Panama and
| Barbades. Their political activity was more tame after the
| prize than before. Both ended their presidential tenures with
| plummeting approval rates, especially because of corruption
| allegations.
|
| Barack Obama (2009) received the Prize for his generous
| discourses on foreign policy, just after being elected. Then he
| lead the USA to more war in Afghanistan, and a new war in
| Libya. He helped Saudi Arabia invade Yemen (UN states this war
| killed 300,000 people). He helped the Egyptian army with its
| coup, that killed thousands of opponents and sent 60,000 in
| jails (including the elected president who died there).
|
| In my opinion, this prize is, most of the time, a dark and
| heavily political joke.
| CaptainOfCoit wrote:
| Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but people are awarded the
| prize based on what they've done, not based on what they
| might do in the future.
|
| I'm not sure you could claim the award is a joke because of
| people did after being awarded it, especially when _most_
| people awarded didn 't launch new wars or helped coups.
| finghin wrote:
| Ideally, we would accept the recipients as being of
| "certified good character". But the stability of this
| pattern shows chronic lack of basic insight into the
| awardees, IMO.
| CaptainOfCoit wrote:
| No, ideally you'd understand under what basis the prize
| is handed out, and then draw your conclusions from that
| (or avoid thinking something specific will happen in the
| future based on the prize itself).
|
| Nothing in the criteria for the handing out the prize has
| anything about the reception having any sort of specific
| character, good or bad. This is all of the conditions for
| the award:
|
| > Fraternity between nations; abolition or reduction of
| standing armies; and the holding and promotion of peace
| congresses
|
| So every year they look at candidates and what they've
| done within those things, then make an judgement.
| stogot wrote:
| Obama didn't actually do anything but get elected and said
| nice things. When he got the Peace Prize, people all over
| the world were confused and thought it was a joke.
| JacobThreeThree wrote:
| The Obama prize decision kind of made the Nobel prize a
| joke.
| aylmao wrote:
| He then went on to become the longest-serving war
| president [1]:
|
| > On May 6, with eight months left before he vacates the
| White House, Mr. Obama passed a somber, little-noticed
| milestone: He has now been at war longer than Mr. Bush,
| or any other American president.
|
| It wasn't all inherited conflicts. He also oversaw the
| 2011 intervention in Libya, the 2014 involvement in
| Syria, and the 2014 re-intervention in Iraq after having
| withdrawn troops in 2011.
|
| [1]: NYT: https://archive.is/diXo5
| cosmicgadget wrote:
| Seems pretty minimal if you subtract the steamy piles
| Cheney left him.
| lyu07282 wrote:
| At least they had fun with it, remember "Terror
| Tuesday's"? And once he even apologized when they
| accidentally bombed a hospital full of white people.
| Cheney's situation room was probably like Dr.Evils lair.
| Obama and Hillary Clinton was more like
| https://youtu.be/dDJa1_fLVeA vibes.
| FergusArgyll wrote:
| Obamas was explicitly given as a hope for the future
| The committee "thought it would strengthen Obama and it
| didn't have this effect", Lundestad told the
| Associated Press, though he fell short of calling the
| award a mistake.[145] "In hindsight, we could say that the
| argument of giving Obama a helping hand was only
| partially correct", Lundestad wrote.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Prize_controversies#200
| 9...
| kranke155 wrote:
| Obama was kind of given the prize as soon as he was first
| elected, which was odd.
|
| Of course it's now led to Trump having a Peace Prize
| obsession, which sis not a bad thing.
| gorbachev wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aung_San_Suu_Kyi
|
| Aung San Suu Kyi, 1991 prize winner, resided over the
| genocide of the Rohingya people.
| somenameforme wrote:
| Yip, when reading his post I thought this would be the most
| obvious example. She was given the award for protesting a
| government that was cracking down hard on protest. She then
| took power and, at the minimum, was complicit in a literal
| genocide. In many ways I think this award should not be
| granted to 'resistance' types because they have a recurring
| habit of becoming even worse than that what they were
| resisting. And it obviously should not be given to
| political leaders based on words instead of actions.
| Actually maybe this prize shouldn't even exist - it's quite
| a joke, especially relative to the prize for the sciences.
| jamincan wrote:
| It really would be better as a posthumous award.
| peterfirefly wrote:
| The Rohingyas were busy killing and raping non-Rohingyas.
| She put a stop to that.
| Cornbilly wrote:
| Baraka Obama won the prize for not being George W Bush and
| for being the first black President of a country with a
| terrible history of enslaving and mistreating black people.
|
| Side note: Democracy will not work in Egypt until the Muslim
| Brotherhood loses popularity and/or Islam in the region
| becomes more moderate. Until then, you're just going to end
| up with the same situation as Ethiopia and Tigray with a
| Brotherhood-dominated government and the Copts.
| rzwitserloot wrote:
| She managed to convince a people of a country that has been
| entrenched in authoritarianism that the vote was rigged without
| using violence.
|
| Imagine one day we wake up after the usual yawn-inducing sham
| elections in Russia and Putin won as usual but a large chunk of
| the country, probably a plurality of it, is utterly convinced
| that it was completely fake and that Navalny won.
|
| Without anybody using violence to do it.
|
| Those who think there is nothing to be done but to counter
| authoritarianism without another authoritarian, or violence, or
| just to give up and suffer it - might be inspired by this.
|
| I'm not the NNC but that seems like a "meaningful
| accomplishment".
|
| You could ask: "Sure, allright, the populace was convinced that
| election was a sham. But... Maduro is still in power so she
| still hasn't done much". Let me flip it around, perhaps: What
| did Gandi ever actually accomplish? Isn't it the same thing:
| Show that violence is not a necessary element, get the people
| to reframe the situation a bit?
|
| Can we _prove_ Gandi sped up the UK 's exit? Even if we can,
| one of those holocaust level holy heck humanity can get
| extremely dark moments in history that is rarely talked about
| is the absolute terror that occurred during the split of the
| Raj into India and Pakistan.
|
| My point is: Judging the eligibility of a person for a peace
| prize on the basis of 'measurable meaningful accomplishment' is
| not how it works and probably shouldn't be how it works. It's
| either a bullshit prize (kissinger got one...) or it is like
| making a statue of somebody: It takes a person, turns them into
| a principle or ideal. Even though humans are much more complex
| than that.
|
| The notion of "one is capable of being in opposition in an
| autocratic regime and get stuff done without resorting to
| violence" got a peace prize, but as per the dictat of Alfred
| Nobel, only people can get it, so, they stuck the label "Maria
| Corina Machado" on it. And that wasn't a bad labelling: She
| really did accomplish 'meaningfully' that goal, at least, I'd
| gather according to most folks' definition of the word
| 'capable'.
| WmWsjA6B29B4nfk wrote:
| > Imagine one day we wake up after the usual yawn-inducing
| sham elections in Russia and Putin won as usual but a large
| chunk of the country, probably a plurality of it, is utterly
| convinced that it was completely fake and that Navalny won.
| Without anybody using violence to do it.
|
| Exactly this happened in Belarus in 2020. Government wasn't
| shy of using its power though, many people got long prison
| sentences, many people had to run, nothing changed wrt to
| dictatorship. I don't see anything inspiring in this story
| honestly.
| voidhorse wrote:
| lol. Speaking of careers, leave it to HN to get a bunch of
| careerists whose main priority is their own pockets to engage
| in some armchair debate about how people who have likely done
| significantly more for the world than they will ever do don't
| deserve a peace prize.
|
| The amount of presumption, ignorance, and lack of reflection in
| your comment is astounding. It shows that you don't take life
| seriously and/or don't understand what risks being an
| opposition party in a dictatorship actually entails.
| segmondy wrote:
| It's so disappointing to see many folks engaging with the troll
| you are. You made this account just to post this garbage. Why
| didn't you post with your regular account? You can't even face
| folks on the internet. Do you think you have what it takes to
| face a dictator in the real world?
| softwaredoug wrote:
| People imagine political movements as something to accomplish
| in their lifetime. When the real movements are multi-
| generational and involve planting trees you'll never enjoy the
| shade of.
|
| I get frustrated in the US we are always thinking in terms of
| the next election. Movements that effect lasting change: civil
| rights, national independence movements, ending slavery, heck
| even the current conservative regime in the US, are all
| multigenerational efforts with clear principles and goals that
| get passed down.
| kingkawn wrote:
| Yes but this is a way for them to give it to someone who
| supports Trump's worldview so that they can try to dodge the
| controversy and pressure being put on them to give it to Trump
| lbrito wrote:
| Look up the winners of 1991 and 2009.
|
| The prize is a joke. Its almost an anti-prize at this point.
| Look at the company you would be with. I definitively would not
| want to be included in that group.
| revel wrote:
| What exactly do you mean by "career politician?" Being a member
| of the opposition in a dictatorship means giving up material
| wealth and putting your life & liberty on the line.
| TrackerFF wrote:
| There has been some speculation that if Trump didn't win this
| one, he'll lose all motivation in making peace, at least in the
| near future. Like for example Gaza.
|
| The man has the shortest attention span in history, and needs
| constant dopamine hits to continue on something.
|
| But as I said in another thread, Maria Corina Machado is more
| than worthy - and well deserved. It is just such a shame that
| Trump will likely throw the biggest tantrum, and destroy stuff,
| for no other reason that he didn't get the big shiny thing he
| wanted.
| goku12 wrote:
| Do you think he would be motivated to continue, had he been
| awarded the medal? His wishes would have been satisfied after
| all.
| 9dev wrote:
| > There has been some speculation that if Trump didn't win this
| one, he'll lose all motivation in making peace, at least in the
| near future. Like for example Gaza.
|
| Were this the reason for him to receive it, he would deserve it
| even less, and erase every shred of dignity this award ever
| had.
| tomp wrote:
| I think Trump _would_ totally deserve it... if the peace turns
| out to be a lasting one.
|
| Big if, there have been many agreements between Israel and
| Palestine!
|
| Probably need to wait at least 2 years, preferably like 8-10
| but by then he might already be dead (natural causes).
| kmijyiyxfbklao wrote:
| That's interesting. I think the last Venezuelan election showed
| there are limits to what you can accomplish with peace.
| davedx wrote:
| Of course there are limits to everything, but conversely look
| at what people like Gandhi achieved
| srean wrote:
| It helped that WW-II broke the British. Non Violence needs an
| audience and a population that i) can feel shame ii) holds
| some power to do something about it.
| goku12 wrote:
| Gandhi's protests were causing turmoil and dissent within
| the UK. Not to forget the fact that the massive Indian
| population had gone into civil disobedience as well, making
| it costlier to rule India. Anymore issues, including any
| harm to Gandhi would have caused massive problems for the
| British, both in India and at their own homeland. They had
| to spend to keep everybody safe and the situation normal.
| That wouldn't have been the outcome of a violent
| revolution. Summarizing, Gandhi's peaceful protest cannot
| be described in simple terms. There are a lot of nuances.
|
| Gandhi's protests are a very valuable source of info on
| both violent and nonviolent protests. It's easy to talk
| about an armed or violent revolution. But it's not a
| decision to be taken very lightly. Apparently, both the
| sides of the American civil war went into it expecting it
| to somehow end in a few days! You know the carnage that
| followed. I have no clue why they held that belief. But it
| supports the fact that people almost always underestimate
| the cost of a war.
|
| Non-violent protests are more effective at garnering
| support and mobilizing a huge movement. The human costs are
| also arguably lesser. I dont know if it's practical all the
| time. But it should be given a big chance if an opportunity
| exists.
| srean wrote:
| Nothing you say contradicts my comment.
|
| Non violent resistance can be and has been crushed many
| times in history.
|
| To win one needs to wield some kind of power or leverage.
| Non violence does not work if your adversary cannot be
| shamed by a moral high ground. It will achieve zilch in
| that case.
| XorNot wrote:
| I've become increasingly uncomfortable with these sorts of
| casual throwabouts of extremely complex and unique
| geopolitical situations though. Gandhi existed in a
| particular moment and context - take the same man and put him
| up against a different regime, and you would not get the same
| outcome.
|
| It's like how people talk up peaceful protest by referencing
| Martin Luther King. He was a major centralizing figure for
| civil rights, but he _did not_ exist in a vacuum of context
| either.
| Cyph0n wrote:
| Precisely. Liberation movements have various tools at their
| disposal. But using the same tool in a different context
| does not guarantee a similar outcome.
|
| On Gandhi in particular, many do not realize that there
| were parallel movements inside India that did resort to
| violence. So the context is not as simple as it may seem.
| peterfirefly wrote:
| There were many millions of violent Indians who helped him
| achieve that.
| jeltz wrote:
| Maybe up to 2 million people died in the process, mostly in
| the partitioning of India and Pakistan, so it was not all
| peaceful.
| gambiting wrote:
| I mean, Poland managed to get rid of communist rule through a
| peaceful process(which doesn't mean people weren't arrested,
| tortured, intimidated and beaten). There was a desire for free
| and democratic elections and it happened.
| breadwinner wrote:
| Notice what they said: This year's peace prize is being given to
| someone for transitioning a country from dictatorship to
| democracy. They sure as hell aren't going to give it to someone
| doing the opposite!
| WmWsjA6B29B4nfk wrote:
| Not for transitioning, for "struggle to achieve transition".
| elashri wrote:
| To be honest, both are struggling to achieve the transition,
| for better or worse.
| foofoo12 wrote:
| Are you suggesting Mango Mussolini isn't in favor of democracy?
| logicchains wrote:
| Mango Man's going to be overjoyed at having another
| justification for going to war with Maduro.
| pydry wrote:
| They certainly _wouldnt_ have given it to Hugo Chavez in 2002
| when he overcame the American backed anti democratic coup to
| overthrow him.
|
| Dissidents in countries which are enemies of the west? With
| enormous oil reserves? With an American fleet poised offshore
| ready for regime change? Definitely. Who are zionists to boot?
| Even better.
|
| Dissidents in brutal, dictatorial countries (e.g. Saudi) which
| are allies? _Hell_ no. Never. The nobel prize is a tool of
| statecraft and that would be a self defeating use of its PR
| potential to advance western foreign policy goals.
| mrtksn wrote:
| To be honest, only Donald Trump takes seriously the Nobel Peace
| price. He cares because Obama got one, no one else cares
| because Obama got one.
|
| Actually its not limited to Obama, its whole history is ridden
| with scandals, definitely a far cry from the Nobel prizes in
| natural sciences.
| AndyMcConachie wrote:
| I guess giving it to Juan Guaido would have been too obvious.
| Y_Y wrote:
| sage
| LeoPanthera wrote:
| "Norway braces for Trump's reaction if he does not win Nobel
| peace prize"
|
| https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/oct/09/norway-braces-...
| globemaster99 wrote:
| lol!! Most people from rest of the world, minus west, knows what
| Nobel prize is all about. It is just a political tool for usa and
| west. Clearly, it about Venezuela oil and gold. Pathetic to see
| their hypocrisy and double standards.
| snitty wrote:
| Is the US going to invade Oslo in retribution?
| Garvi wrote:
| Living in the information age was supposed to mean we'll be
| better informed. Reading the opinions in this thread just
| shatters any hope for humanity.
| poszlem wrote:
| The funny thing is, both sides can read your comment and assume
| you're talking about the other side having the "wrong" opinion.
| It's the kind of platitude that doesn't really add anything, it
| just signals that you see yourself as being above "the wrong
| side", whichever side that happens to be.
| palmfacehn wrote:
| I projected my distaste for rampant partisanship into the
| comment. So far I've only seen one comment which is
| informative and on topic.
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45537006
| Garvi wrote:
| > you see yourself as being above "the wrong side", whichever
| side that happens to be
|
| The actually sad thing is, it's pretty damn obvious.
| aylmao wrote:
| I'm not sure who is down-voting this comment. Seems pretty
| accurate to me.
| mrguyorama wrote:
| Why do people have this weird idea that humans reliably pick
| the _correct_ answer, even given infinite information?
|
| Humans are _incapable of being rational_ , it's not how our
| brains function. We can, with great effort, emulate what we
| _think_ rational thought would be like.
|
| Human brains regularly lie to themselves because it is cheaper
| or easier than actually processing input.
|
| You know that fun retort: "Who are you going to believe, me or
| your lying eyes?", and how it's always trotted out as this
| supposed retort to someone suggesting you ignore obvious info,
| but _our eyes are lying to us constantly_. There are tons of
| ways your eyes cheat, or lie, or outright ignore reality in
| favor of some internal model. This isn 't even limited to
| optical illusions!
|
| And the same is true of _all sensory input_ we have. There are
| auditory illusions and ways your ears lie to you. There are
| things like phantom limbs that demonstrate your brain will
| ignore _explicit and clear reality_ for no reason.
|
| Humans are _emotional_ creatures, like all biological
| creatures. Humans make choices _emotionally_
|
| Do you think the most emotionally charged information will
| always be truthful?
|
| The outcome we are experiencing was obvious, but people ignored
| it because that sort of implies that information _needs_ to be
| filtered or curated and that makes people nervous.
| daliz wrote:
| This is very sad.
| ta20240528 wrote:
| I feel I speak for a lot of us when I say that Barrack Obama or
| Hillary Clinton should have won it.
|
| Just to see what happens.
| johnjames87 wrote:
| Everyone knows who the real winner is.
| ksynwa wrote:
| Would have preferred it going to aid workers in Gaza or something
| like that but an NED-funded dissident politician will do as long
| as it's not Donald Trump.
| pcthrowaway wrote:
| Greta or aid workers in Gaza would have been great choices
| chrneu wrote:
| lol Greta would be a great choice. It would piss off so many
| people and satisfy the real goal of the peace prize: to stir
| up controversy.
| pphysch wrote:
| If only it was that simple. The real goal seems to be
| laundering the reputation of (bad) troublemakers and
| warmongers.
| mkoubaa wrote:
| I don't think you understand what the Nobel prizes are actually
| about
| cced wrote:
| It's all just propaganda to push forward US foreign policy
| objectives?
| Nevermark wrote:
| Things in the US seem to keep sliding toward further power
| centralization. Regardless of politics, that is bad policy of the
| highest order (bit).
|
| Great opportunity for someone to create some effective
| opposition.
|
| There is a medal in it!
|
| Ironically, someone who badly wants a medal is actually in the
| perfect position to turn around the brain/competency drain,
| "bring back science", boost US competition with China's green
| tech wave, help Ukraine win (instead of the endless: "not lose
| for now"), fire the all the senate confirmed bozos...
|
| If he did, a Nobel prize would be unconventional under the
| circumstances. But well worth it nevertheless.
|
| No Rushmore. There isn't enough room left on that mountain for
| that size of an ego. But maybe a genuine gold working toilet
| installation for Rushmore tourists.
|
| ------
|
| Humor, despair and any bias of mine aside. I am quite seriously
| unaware of anyone with a good opposition plan, to reverse the
| power centralization, at this point.
|
| Perhaps a constitutional amendment, reaffirming key points of the
| existing constitution with a highlighter for supreme justices
| with poor eyesight, might be one promising approach.
|
| > "No person shall" [ _something, something_ ] "hold any office"
| [ _something, something_ ], "who, having" [ _something,
| something_ ] "engaged in insurrection", [ _something, something_
| ] "or given aid" [ _or incited, or encouraged insurrection, or
| threatened a vice president for not implementing an insurrection,
| or delayed relief for law enforcement engaged in stopping an
| insurrection_ ] "or comfort" [ _or praise or approval or promises
| of pardons_ ] "to the enemies thereof."
|
| > [ _...All the powers of the purse given to the representative
| branch, with no provision for presidential "creative"
| reinterpretation..._ ]
|
| > [ _Etc., etc._ ]
|
| If anyone wants to give a shout out to anyone building effective
| resistance to the avalanche of presidential power, essentially
| being voluntarily abdicated by the other two branches, I would be
| interested to hear of them.
|
| (Traditionally that has been a very high consensus bipartisan
| issue. Not everyone, but most everyone.)
| benrutter wrote:
| > Humor, despair and any bias of mine aside. I am quite
| seriously unaware of anyone with a good opposition plan, to
| reverse the power centralization, at this point.
|
| Interesting point! Bit of a tangent, bit Brazil is in the
| process of holding Bolsonaro to account for power grabs that
| have a lot of similarities with what's happening in the US.
|
| Too early to call their long term efficacy, but definitely one
| to watch.
| GolfPopper wrote:
| > _I am quite seriously unaware of anyone with a good
| opposition plan, to reverse the power centralization, at this
| point._
|
| Trump, and the regime associated with him, are an exploitation
| of _preexisting_ degradation of limited, democratic and
| responsible governance in the United States. The restoration of
| "good government" is the obvious counter to his rising
| dictatorship, but that would result in other existing power
| blocs (themselves also abusive, if not so gratuitously as
| Trump) loosing their own ability to exploit the system after he
| exits the stage. Faced with a choice between "stop Trump and
| end our own abuses as a consequence" or "let him run rampant
| and hope the US survives so that we can exploit it later"
| established American institutions have overwhelmingly gone with
| the second option.
| Nevermark wrote:
| The Democrats don't appear to be falling down the same hole.
|
| They are not rallying for or under an Anti-Trump, but looking
| for a credible remedy for Trump.
|
| Unfortunately, that is a much harder challenge, given how
| centralized their opponent party's representative power has
| become. Centralized power is so dangerous, because it is so
| effective.
|
| And the Supreme Court's participation in that centralization
| adds a formidable head wind to any reform.
|
| I just don't see the Democrat being able to take the same
| road. Even if they wanted to.
|
| I think the future for now is balanced between Trump
| successfully tilting the next elections enough to continue to
| sideline Democrats, or attempting to do so and triggering a
| sea change/backlash that gives Democrats some significant
| power to attempt reforms with.
| raffael_de wrote:
| Purely political topics such as this should be automatically
| banned by policy on HN.
| verbify wrote:
| The guidelines state:
|
| > Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports,
| or celebrities, unless they're evidence of some interesting new
| phenomenon. Videos of pratfalls or disasters, or cute animal
| pictures. If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-
| topic.
| Propelloni wrote:
| Why?
| palmfacehn wrote:
| More than 90% of the comments are partisan attacks on Trump.
| I'm happy for her win, but the topic doesn't stimulate a high
| quality discussion.
| raffael_de wrote:
| even if it did - the submission is purely about politics
| and should be discussed at r/worldnews for example.
| JKCalhoun wrote:
| I'm not seeing that. I am seeing an overwhelming number of
| comments about Venezuela and the legitimacy of the Nobel
| Peace Prize over the years.
| wtfwhateven wrote:
| >More than 90% of the comments are partisan attacks on
| Trump.
|
| Why would you tell such an easily refutable lie?
| tomp wrote:
| No, some comments are good. But make sure to flag the offending
| ones.
| tgv wrote:
| How is it a political topic here? Perhaps in Venezuela it is,
| but here?
| add-sub-mul-div wrote:
| What a boring fucking site that would be. Just man up and admit
| you don't like these specific politics.
| anthk wrote:
| A Trumpist witch against a dumb ogre (Maduro). It doesn't make
| her any better.
|
| This woman has been sided with Vox in Spain, a pro-Francoist
| party which they didn't condemn the former Fascist regime. And I
| remind you all Franco supported Hitler (Hendaye meeting) with
| Wolframium as a raw metal for the war; and he event sent the Blau
| Division against Russia in WWII.
|
| So this woman indirectly supports parties which applauded people
| accountable on sending American WWII soldiers back home... in
| coffins.
|
| Neither Maduro, Trump nor Zelenskii deserve it.
| severino wrote:
| 100% true, although the opinion is unpopular in this forum. In
| the end, this is rewarding some very bad people just because
| they oppose somebody (supposedly) even worse. But that doesn't
| have anything to do with "peace". This award lost its meaning a
| long time ago, maybe Netanyahu will be the winner next year.
| NoGravitas wrote:
| She is also a fervent supporter of Israel, and has said,
| "Israel's fight is Venezuela's fight."
| skatebearr wrote:
| Yeah it's the same a criminal dictator than the person risking
| her life to overthrown him peacefully. Maria Corina is trying
| to get all the support possible, and in Spain that support
| clearly comes from the right, not the left. Maybe because the
| two main left parties have well known ties with the regime.
| anthk wrote:
| she it's the same populist but from the other side of the
| coin.
| gverrilla wrote:
| What a joke.
| EbNar wrote:
| Poor Trump /s
| GoToRO wrote:
| Who said there are no good news? For the people that never lived
| in a dictatorship here are a few reasons people were killed in
| one: * grafitty agains the regime * making anti refime jokes *
| beeing a top official and saying you don't think the direction we
| are going is good
|
| Beeing thrown in prison for years reasons: * owning a walkie
| talkie. Can be used to organize a revolution they said *
| listening to foreign radio stations
| NalNezumi wrote:
| I don't know much about her but it's truly sad to see how
| absolutely eeeeeveryyyyy media reporting about this have to
| report it with Trump, or in relation to his statements. Man must
| sucks to be her, limelight is still on Trump, truly a showman.
|
| And to repeat my point that I do every year: Nobel peace prize is
| the only part of the price that is actually given out by a
| foreign political body (Norway, founding member of NATO and Oil
| nation) and not the Swedish academy.
|
| It's famous recepients include presidents that bombed/joined war
| during/just after been given it and bloggers that kept blogging
| after surviving shootings. And Henry Kissinger
|
| Petition to rename it to "Norwegian peace price". /signed, a
| Swede
| veqz wrote:
| What, are you not impressed by us putting retired politicians
| into an independent committee according to their party's
| political power in parliament??
|
| Are you suggesting that the committee should consist of some
| kind of qualified experts instead of non-competent
| politicians?!
|
| Preposterous. Typically of a Swede.
|
| (To be fair to Nobel himself, the world was a bit different
| when he authored his testament, and Norway was relatively
| innocent still.)
| nonethewiser wrote:
| Because Donald Trump is the most deserving winner of the Nobel
| Peace Prize since Nelson Mandela in 1993. Especially so for
| those that think Israel was committing a genocide.
| LunaSea wrote:
| I'm sure that the guy sending to prison and extraditing
| people without due process is a very deserving of a peace
| prize.
| DudeOpotomus wrote:
| LOL. Do you actually believe this nonsense?
| SalmoShalazar wrote:
| The literal words that she said? Why would we call this
| nonsense?
| yoyohello13 wrote:
| Nothing says peace like sending the military to occupy your
| own cities.
| aylmao wrote:
| > Man must sucks to be her, limelight is still on Trump, truly
| a showman.
|
| She did dedicate this prize to Trump [1]:
|
| > I dedicate this prize to the suffering people of Venezuela
| and to President Trump for his decisive support of our cause!
|
| She is a vocal Trump supporter after all [2].
|
| [1]: https://x.com/MariaCorinaYA/status/1976642376119549990
|
| [2]: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-
| politic...
| SalmoShalazar wrote:
| This is deeply related to Trump and is all part of
| manufacturing consent for the eventual invasion or coup on
| Venezuela.
| major505 wrote:
| Its fair. She done a crucial job uniting the different interests
| of the oposition of the venezuelan goverment/cartel.
|
| Too bad they where so divided for so many years, that when they
| trully worked together to wind a election it was too late because
| now MAduro dont even care to steal the ellections in plain sigth
| and probably theres no more solution without violence.
| MaxPock wrote:
| Performative
| indiantinker wrote:
| She definitely trumped this one.
| madacol wrote:
| Even if Venezuela goes to hell even deeper, she still deserves
| the prize for what she has already done!
|
| The way she, and her team, managed to convince venezuelans that
| the election mattered, and to prepare to gather the evidence of
| the elections under constant threats from the government, that we
| all knew they were going to steal, and do it entirely peacefully,
| was an extremely impressive achievement on its own.
|
| What an impressive act of coordination from MCM
|
| :standing-ovation:
| jmyeet wrote:
| Disclaimer: I'm not accusing you of (intentionally or
| unintentionally) doing this but your comment brought up the
| issue.
|
| For a lot of horrific events in the world, you will find a bias
| exposed by the use of active vs passive voice. Compare:
|
| - "100 children died". How?
|
| - "100 children killed". By whom? Why? How?
|
| - "100 children killed in conflict". Between who? How? Why?
|
| ' "100 children killed in air strike on refugee camp by X".
| Oh...
|
| The point is that a lot of people treat what is happening in
| Venezuela like it's some kind of unavoidable natural disaster
| like an earthquake. This reinforces the idea that nobody is
| responsible and, more improtantly, there's nothing we can do.
|
| Venezuelans are being intentionally starved to death by
| economic sanctions (that's what sactions are). Why? Because
| Maduro is bad. Sound familiar? It should. Castro was bad.
| Saddam Hussein was bad (despite being a US puppet for decades).
|
| The actual issue is that these people threaten the interests of
| Western companies. That's it. That's the only thing that
| matters.
| throwawaymaths wrote:
| what interest does north korea threaten?
| SalmoShalazar wrote:
| Is this a serious question? SK is a strong ally of the USA
| and along with Japan bolsters their presence in this part
| of Asia. China, a geopolitical enemy of the USA, is also
| lightly allied with NK.
| ponector wrote:
| Or rather was a strong ally? I bet you are not imposing
| 25% tariff to your strong ally.
| danabrams wrote:
| Maduro, Castro, and Saddam Hussein are/were bad. Castro and
| Hussein, at least, committed murders to maintain power and
| Maduro pulled a coup after he lost an election.
|
| Whether they were worth removing is another question, but if
| you could flip a switch and magically replace them with
| something better (with no cost and a guarantee the
| replacement would not be a murderous authoritarian) you would
| of course do it.
| jmyeet wrote:
| In 1988, Saddam Hussein dropped nerve gas on Kurds. Saddam
| was then a US ally and a foil against Iran. The US had
| propped up that war killing _millions_ of Iraqis and
| Iranians for almost a decade for basically a net zero
| outcome. Why was Iran an enemy? Because the US deposed the
| democratically elected government in 1953 becasue they
| threatened to nationalize their own oil reserves.
|
| Do you see a pattern here? Like at all?
|
| The key point is that Saddam could drop nerve gas on Iraqi
| citizens and it still didn't change him being a US ally
| (and puppet). We don't care about someone being "bad". We
| never have. Saddam only ceased to become an ally when he
| invaded Kuwait and threatened our truly regional ally,
| Saudi Arabia.
|
| All Castro did was overthrow Batisa, another US ally, and
| nationalize Cuban assets.
|
| Hungary is a member of NATO and a US ally despite Viktor
| Orban essentially overthrowing democracy and genuinely
| being bad.
|
| We helped overthrow Basher Al-Asaad. The al-asaads were
| former US allies too by the way. Why? Because now they were
| bad. Who is the new Syrian president? A man by the name of
| Ahmed al-Sharaa. Who is that you might ask? A former al-
| Qaeda leader, you know the guys were the Big Bad [tm] for
| 9/11. But that's OK, he (allegedly) cut ties with al-Aqeda
| in 2016 so all is forgiven. Let's not look too deeply into
| 15 or the 19 9/11 hijackers being Saudi.
|
| Here's the lesson: whenever the US says someone is being
| punished, bombed, sanctioned, invaded or whatever because
| they're "bad" know that it's a lie. I mean they might be
| bad. But that's never the reason for whatever the latest
| punitive action is. Always, always, always the reason is
| become the interests of US foreign policy or Western
| companies is being threatened.
| terio wrote:
| > All Castro did was overthrow Batisa, another US ally,
| and nationalize Cuban assets.
|
| That's not all. Castro also executed thousands creating a
| terror regime, nationalized American assets, funded and
| aided guerrillas in Latin America and Africa, aligned
| himself with the Soviet Union and caused the Missiles
| Crisis. He replaced a brutal dictatorship with another
| brutal dictatorship, a communist one, and ran the Cuban
| economy into the ground.
| jmyeet wrote:
| You don't know history.
|
| The so-called Cuban Missile Crisis didn't begin on
| October 16, 1962. Nor did it begin when the Soviet Union
| put missiles on Cuban territory. It began when the US put
| nuclear missiles (Jupiter MRBMs) in Turkey, mere hundreds
| of miles from Moscow. Those were quietly removed months
| after the crisis because of a secret agreement between
| JFK and Khrushchev.
|
| And yes, Cuba nationalized assets. As I said. You say
| that like it's a bad thing. Why is the US doing
| colonialism and imperialism a good thing that needs to be
| defended exactly?
|
| And let's say Batista and Castro were both brutal
| dictatorships (which is what you said), why is one bad
| and one good? Why is one an ally and another a mortal
| enemy? You're making my point: the US does not and never
| has cared about people being bad or doing bad things.
| It's purely about economic interests. That's it.
|
| Oh and Castro's involvement in Latin America? I'm sorry,
| what? From overthrowing the government in Guatemala in
| 1954 at the behest of a US fruit company to propping up
| Pinochet in Chile to Noriega in Nicaragua to El Salvador
| to Columbia and so on, let's compare Castro's impact and
| legacy to that of the US and see who has done the most
| harm, shall we?
|
| The Cuban economy suffered because the US starved it. But
| of course Castro gets the blame for that too.
| xg15 wrote:
| > _Castro also executed thousands creating a terror
| regime_
|
| ...so naturally, the solution is to make the life of the
| people under that regime _even worse_ by sanctioning the
| country?
|
| > _nationalized American assets, funded and aided
| guerrillas in Latin America and Africa, aligned himself
| with the Soviet Union and caused the Missiles Crisis._
|
| in other words, did things that threatened American
| interests.
| energy123 wrote:
| It's wild to claim Saddam was a US ally just two years
| before Iraq invaded Kuwait against US demands and got
| bombed by the US in the Gulf War. You are confusing
| offshore balancing between Iraq and Iran during the Iran-
| Iraq war with "ally". You need to look up the definitions
| of these words.
|
| And to claim Assad was a US ally is even more outrageous,
| where to even start. He was a Russian ally and a
| Hezbollah ally, not a US ally. All of his military
| equipment came from Russia. All of his air support came
| from Russia. He allowed Iranian arms to flow to Hezbollah
| and was supported on the ground in Syria by Hezbollah.
| And he is now hiding in Russia playing video games after
| killing hundreds of thousands of civilians. He and the US
| had a common foe in ISIS for a period, but they were
| otherwise antagonistic over the duration of the civil
| war.
| xg15 wrote:
| Yes, but the point is that sanctions don't get rid of those
| people, they're just collective punishment on the
| population. (Plus are used for propaganda if the blame for
| an economic crisis in a country is put entirely on its
| regime or economic system and the fact that the country is
| currently under sanctions is conveniently omitted. See
| again: Cuba, Venezuela)
|
| At the end of the day the purpose of sanctions is to
| deliberately worsen the quality of life of the population
| in the sanctioned country. That can't be a tool for good.
| tim333 wrote:
| It's debatable who's fault starvation is. Maduro might have
| something to do with it. I'm not sure how it threatens
| western companies.
| astrange wrote:
| GenX leftists think every problem in the world is caused by
| "corporations" and if you think any given problem is not
| caused by "corporations" they will assume you're lying. It
| goes beyond believing in conspiracy theories; they're
| literally incapable of believing in something /unless/ it's
| a conspiracy theory.
|
| Most recent examples being "climate change is caused by 100
| companies" and "housing prices are caused by BlackRock"
| which are both entirely fictional.
|
| (There is an obvious rightist equivalent of this which has
| historically caused a lot more problems.)
| jmyeet wrote:
| Letter from the President and Prime Minister Mossadegh on
| the Oil Situation and the Problem of Aid to Iran dated
| July 9, 1953 (emphasis added) [1]:
|
| > It was primarily because of that hope that the United
| States Government during the last two years has made
| earnest efforts to assist in eliminating certain
| differences between Iran and the United Kingdom which
| have arisen as a result of the _nationalization of the
| Iranian oil industry_. It has been the belief of the
| United States that the reaching of an agreement in the
| matter of compensation would strengthen confidence
| throughout the world in the determination of Iran fully
| to adhere to the principles which render possible a
| harmonious community of free nations; that it would
| contribute to the strengthening of the international
| credit standing of Iran; and that it would lead to the
| solution of some of the financial and economic problems
| at present facing Iran.
|
| Effect on National Security Interests in Latin America of
| Possible Anti-Trust Proceedings, June 1, 1953 [2]:
|
| > Elsewhere in Central America, institution of the action
| would greatly stimulate movements to nationalize the
| properties of the Company. Such nationalization is now
| threatened to some degree in all countries in which the
| Company operates, particularly in Costa Rica through the
| possible accession to the presidency of Jose Figueres,
| who is not a Communist but is openly speaking of
| nationalization. To the extent such nationalization is
| achieved, it would not only affect a private company, but
| would have direct and far-reaching repercussions on our
| strategic position.
|
| National Intelligent Estimate: CHILE: THE ALTERNATIVES
| FACING THE ALLENDE REGIME, June 29, 1972 [3]:
|
| > n the basis of the record so far, Chile's future course
| remains to a large extent an open issue. To be sure, the
| regime carried out a substantial part of its program
| during its first year, particularly in the economic area.
| With little effective opposition--indeed, in many cases
| with a broad consensus--Allende nationalized key economic
| sectors, redistributed income in favor of the poorer
| classes, and accelerated land expropriation.
|
| [1]: https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/exchange-
| messages-...
|
| [2]: https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus19
| 52-54v04...
|
| [3]: https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus19
| 69-76ve1...
| energy123 wrote:
| This is the issue with all populist ideologies, where
| there is one monolithic boogieman that explains all ills.
| The real world just doesn't work like that. It's an
| interesting case study into confirmation bias and bad
| quality thinking, I guess.
| ErneX wrote:
| Venezuelans are being starved by the sheer
| incompetency/corruption of its leaders. It's a kleptocracy.
|
| The collapse started way earlier than the sanctions. It's
| funny, but it's even insulting that some people cannot
| comprehend that there is evil beyond their own frontiers. Not
| everything wrong that happens in the world is because an
| empire is meddling, we are also capable of being useless by
| ourselves!
| maxglute wrote:
| > Not everything wrong that happens in the world is because
| an empire is meddling, we are also capable of being useless
| by ourselves!
|
| A petrostate kleptocracy can still trickle down enough
| scraps for it's people. An empire that controls global
| markets that sanctions an petrostate kleptocracy into just
| a kleptocracy, can't. The reality is no amount of competent
| governance is going to enable a petrostate like VZ to not
| be a shitshow if it's sanctioned from maintaining
| extractive infra (techstack controlled by empire) or sell
| in global markets. It's not about just being useless, but
| the inability to be useful no matter what you do. Yes, VZ
| got fucked from oil $100->$40 pre sanctions, but that's
| still a survivable/pivotable scenario than oil production
| going from 3 mbd to 400k mbd due to sanctions that prevents
| reconstitution of production. There's a reason economic
| freefall stabilized when Cheveron got license in 2022 that
| brought production back up to 1mbd.
|
| Now you can argue a "competent" government would have
| conceded to Monroe (like Machado) in the first place, or
| not pissed off US in backyard. Like, I get it, you're
| living through the shit, but don't be
| economically/geopolitically naive, US didn't sanction VZ
| because muh democracy decline under Muduro when US props up
| other petro authoritarian MENA states. The only difference
| is US meddle with those that align with US interests and
| not, and US meddling is what makes or breaks petro states.
| ErneX wrote:
| I think it's you who is naive. Plus Maduro is even
| offering our riches to Trump if they leave him alone:
|
| https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/10/world/americas/maduro-
| ven...
|
| Seems he lost the anti imperialist mojo.
| maxglute wrote:
| >In Washington, American officials offer differing
| assessments of the talks. One U.S. official said the
| reports of negotiations over the lifting of sanctions and
| access to the Venezuelan market was "not an accurate
| assessment of what took place." ... >As Mr. Grenell and
| Mr. Maduro's envoys negotiated a deal, the leader of
| Venezuela's main opposition movement, Maria Corina
| Machado, pitched her own economic proposal in Washington.
|
| Did you not even read the article, like it's 2025,
| posting NYT article regarding US adversary like VZ and
| analyzing it naively is useful idiot behavior. That said,
| Trump is not a LIO woketard and someone Maduro thinks can
| be negotiated with, the fact is Maduro is fine with
| operating under US umbrella, provided US didn't do
| retarded shit like try a muh democracy regime change like
| under past US admins. Of course US establishment would
| still prefer a tool like Machado, but there's a chance
| under Trump that they'll accept Maduro. That's why the
| article talks about both Machado an and Maduro parallel
| barginning. This just 101 signalling, dangling Machado
| for more Maduro concessions - Machado isn't actually an
| option, because you know, she'll get disappeared if
| Maduro thinks US can actuall regime change with her.
| Hence Machado and this sus (granted marginally deserved)
| Nobel peace prize is good pressure to get Maduro to
| concede more. The fact that Maduro is making offer is
| because he knows there's framework for him staying in
| power, unlike past US admin zero-sum/maximum pressure
| play with Guaido. He know's a non-democratic VZ like non-
| democratic MENA petrostate that aligns with US interests
| is workable under Trump who is moving away from democracy
| promotion to realist foreign policy especially with
| recent strategic shift in focusing on South America.
| 29athrowaway wrote:
| The Venezuelan regime makes money from oil. They do not need to
| involve the population to generate most of the GDP. To them,
| spending resources to have a healthy and happy populace is just
| a waste of money that would otherwise go to the rulers of the
| regime. The CGP "Rules for rulers" explains how this happens:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs
|
| They stay in power with the help of a paramilitary group of
| bullies that intimidates people: colectivos. The Venezuelan
| colectivos are based on the Cuban CDR (committee for the
| defense of the revolution). And there are other elements of the
| Cuban "model" of staying in power that has "worked" for 66
| years, that Venezuelan regime has adopted. And the CDR
| resembles the Nazi Sturmabteilung in their modus operandi.
|
| So in the end what's holding the regime together is all
| violence, all the way down.
|
| The history lesson is that when the most of the GDP generation
| doesn't need without the help of the population, the result is
| a regime. Scalable and cost efficient AGI will do the same to
| countries that do not make most of their GDP from extracting
| natural resources because once the citizen is not needed for
| wealth generation, territorial control, etc., their political
| representation goes away.
| baincs wrote:
| > The history lesson is that when the most of the GDP
| generation doesn't need without the help of the population,
| the result is a regime. Scalable and cost efficient AGI will
| do the same to countries that do not make most of their GDP
| from extracting natural resources because once the citizen is
| not needed for wealth generation, territorial control, etc.,
| their political representation goes away.
|
| That's a great insight
| 29athrowaway wrote:
| It is possible that in a future where territorial control
| is done by robots and drones that are mass produced and
| maybe even self-replicating, and the scientific and
| economic output comes from AGI, there won't be ballot boxes
| anymore. There will be also no food stamps, hospitals, a
| justice system or anything that benefits the common person.
| Everyone will just be building power plants and datacenters
| and robot factories while being supervised a robot or being
| implanted with a motor control chip, or being processed
| into Soylent green to be fed to a chemical reactor to power
| a data center with the same level of indifference we
| currently have for animals in industrial farming. All while
| the people running the dystopia party all day and take
| selfies while not caring at all.
| Retric wrote:
| At that point human leadership and wealth becomes just as
| superfluous as the rest of humanity. However it isn't
| necessarily a stable system.
| kjkjadksj wrote:
| The difference is that leadership and wealth has agency
| and power. Of course the coming dystopia will serve to
| benefit them exclusively. Who do you think is calling the
| shots here today? Billionaires are. These are products
| designed for them by people they hired. The idea of using
| profit to create a billionaire is already inefficient and
| yet, that is how most of these companies are structured
| to burn profit on enriching the few vs having the ceo
| live like a monk and putting everything back into the
| company.
| Retric wrote:
| Leadership and wealth are quite fluid in major
| transitions.
|
| Read up on the US robber barons and they didn't come from
| old money. The relatively recent (80's to today) round of
| Tech billionaires don't hail back to earlier great
| fortunes and most VC investors lost money compared to a
| simple index fund.
|
| The first few rounds of AI investors are already getting
| screwed.
| kalavan wrote:
| Doesn't Norway bring that conclusion in doubt? The state
| gets massive revenue from oil as well as oil-financed
| investments, but is still very much a democracy.[0]
|
| [0] https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/democracy-index-
| eiu?tab=t...
| 29athrowaway wrote:
| Because they need they still need the favor of the
| populace for collective defense and territorial control.
|
| The regional military powers have more population.
| iambateman wrote:
| Sure. It's also possible Norway is just an outlier and
| not the coming norm.
|
| I personally - as an American of Norwegian descent - am
| proud of how they've built much of their country...and I
| hope we can learn from it.
| kalavan wrote:
| It might be that democratic countries are more resilient
| to that kind of effect because (and to the degree that)
| they already decouple productive power from
| representation.
|
| E.g. a welfare state doesn't make sense from a purely
| GDP-selfish perspective, beyond as a crime-prevention
| tool, since people on disability benefits don't work. But
| they still exist.
| netsharc wrote:
| According to this article, it was down to 1 Iraqi:
|
| https://www.ft.com/content/99680a04-92a0-11de-b63b-00144f
| eab...
| schainks wrote:
| Rachel Maddow's "Blowout" is a must read related to this
| insight.
| cyberax wrote:
| > The history lesson is that when the most of the GDP
| generation doesn't need without the help of the population
|
| Counterexample: China. Or plenty of African countries. Being
| a petrocracy certainly makes authoritarianism easier, but
| it's not at all a requirement.
| 29athrowaway wrote:
| Petrocracy is a weird term because it is not oil itself the
| one ruling but the ones who control the oil. We have a term
| for that, oligarchy.
| deafpolygon wrote:
| Trump is going to be upset.
| jb1991 wrote:
| This is absolutely huge, the biggest one. Congrats to Maria. It's
| really a big one.
| chvid wrote:
| The US is about to invade Venezuela and she is cheering for it.
| aglavine wrote:
| Maduro is a cartel drug boss. One of the worst criminal on
| Earth. Exiled citizens from Venezuela are counted by millions.
|
| And still your comment is about 'US invading Venezuela' and not
| about the people suffering.
|
| Maduro is a scum that has took Venezuela by brute force. Any
| effort to wipe him out will improve dramatically the lives of
| millions.
|
| But please go on with your 'US invading countries' narrative
| and don't even think for a minute about the people.
| aylmao wrote:
| If the USA cared about the Venezuelan people they'd lift the
| sanctions. The USA cares about toppling a regime that knows
| its sitting on an oil gold-mine and wont let American
| companies freely run away with it.
| astrange wrote:
| You'd think people would give up on claiming we're trying
| to take other countries' oil when we didn't take any of
| Iraq's and instead became an oil exporter ourselves.
| energy123 wrote:
| Maduro is offering the US access to gold and oil, which the
| US declined, according to NYT reporting.
| pphysch wrote:
| Yeah, yeah, we've heard this all before, literally dozens of
| times.
|
| Sovereign states that have important natural resources or
| geopolitical position are _always_ run by Bad Guys that we
| need to invade and kill. The media said so!
| chvid wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War
|
| What does it tell about a politician of a country that wishes
| for that sort of thing on her fellow countrymen?
| bawolff wrote:
| You know, funilly enough, if trump's peace plan for the gaza war
| actually holds, then that idiot has somehow probably done more
| for peace than most nobel peace prize winners.
| parrellel wrote:
| Eh, I'm not holding out much hope, Israel was doing more
| bombing runs a couple hours ago according to the news.
| dlubarov wrote:
| Do you have a source? Israel says the ceasefire started this
| morning, and they've already been withdrawing troops.
| parrellel wrote:
| Reading through it, it looks like they were just using all
| of their 24 hours until ceasefire.
| https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/gaza-city-residents-
| set-...
|
| Ceasefire went into effect ~5AM Eastern, they were still
| bombing when I went to bed.
| pluc wrote:
| Here come the sanctions
| pphysch wrote:
| Venezuela is already heavily sanctioned and on the cusp of
| military invasion by USA. Machado is a core part of this
| campaign. She won't be sanctioned, she will be installed.
| kiviuq wrote:
| She supports Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the
| Genocide of the Palestinians
| whodidntante wrote:
| I did not recognize her name, but after doing some research, I am
| impressed by her work, and do not have an issue with her getting
| the prize.
|
| However, her accomplishments were also clear last summer, and I
| feel it would have been far more appropriate to give her the
| prize last year. Instead, it went to an organization that has
| been around for 70 years. While they have done great work, there
| was nothing they did specifically in 2024 that stood out, at
| least that I could find. So, clearly, Machado was not an obvious
| choice, at least last year.
|
| Also want to add that I don't think Trump should have gotten it,
| simply because it is far too early to tell if the current "middle
| east peace plan" will actually turn out to be more than just
| fanfare.
|
| A better statement would have been to have no peace prize this
| year.
| veqz wrote:
| The final nominations are received in January...
| whodidntante wrote:
| Did not realize this, you are correct. I thought nominations
| were accepted until late in the year since so many people
| were "nominating" Trump, even before the middle east thing.
|
| But I am confused, Obama got his prize in 2009, which would
| mean he did not receive it for anything he did as president,
| and before that he was only domestically focused, afaik.
|
| edit - I also see from other comments that people were
| placing bets on trump for the prize, which would not make
| sense if he had to be nominated by 1/31
| JumpinJack_Cash wrote:
| Trump will never win, nobody who floods the zone with a low
| signal/noise ratio will ever win this prize or any of the 'elite'
| prizes.
|
| The low signal/noise ratio people are at best perceived as
| 'communicators' more often jesters.
|
| If anything the anomaly of the social media era is that people
| who put themselves out there as low signal/noise ratio character
| are even taken seriously at all.
|
| Prizes like that are given to people who are perceived to be
| special, the more you talk and yap the more you give people an
| opportunity to realize how NOT special you are and how NOT
| special your character is.
|
| Peter Grant did it best with his clients Led Zeppelin back in the
| days, keeping them in the dark before and after the 3.5 hour
| shows.
| Stevvo wrote:
| In other news, the US appears to be preparing for war with
| Venezuela, an invasion is imminent. I wonder if that source of
| thing affects the committee?
| pphysch wrote:
| Definitely. Machado fits the profile of a "smol bean
| opposition" and is involved in a situation that USA government
| has great interest in (and she has great relationships with
| those on Capitol Hill). While Trump personally wants the award,
| the USG would have no qualms also lobbying for Machado as part
| of their "maximum pressure" campaign against Venezuelan
| sovereignty.
| VeninVidiaVicii wrote:
| Why on earth did she dedicate it to Trump?
| aylmao wrote:
| She's a vocal Trump supporter [1].
|
| [1]: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-
| politic...
| aylmao wrote:
| She's a vocal Trump supporter [1]. Last time Trump was
| president his administration did attempt to coup Venezuela [2]:
|
| > Tapper returned to Bolton's remark about having helped plan
| coups.
|
| > Bolton said: "I'm not going to get into the specifics."
|
| > Tapper asked: "Successful coups?"
|
| > Bolton said: "Well, I wrote about Venezuela in in the book
| and it turned out not to be successful.
|
| > Before Bolton joined the Trump administration, it was widely
| reported that Trump wanted to use the US military to oust
| Maduro. In August 2017, Trump told reporters: "We have many
| options for Venezuela, this is our neighbour."
|
| > "We want as our principal objective the peaceful transfer of
| power but I will say again, as [Trump] has said from the
| outset, and Nicolas Maduro and those supporting him,
| particularly those who are not Venezuelan, should know, all
| options are on the table."
|
| [1]: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-
| politic...
|
| [2]: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/former-senior-us-
| official-j...
| nothrowaways wrote:
| Rigged
| yalogin wrote:
| Care to elaborate?
| thelastgallon wrote:
| White House knocks Nobel Committee for snubbing Trump, but Peace
| Prize winner praises him: https://www.cnbc.com/2025/10/10/trump-
| nobel-peace-prize-mach...
| DudeOpotomus wrote:
| Do you also think that strippers are into their customers?
| danielovichdk wrote:
| Now, go out and fight for what you believe in.
| keybored wrote:
| There is a lot of conflict in the world. Causes that seem more
| urgent and important than yet another supposed authoritarian
| regime in Latin America.
|
| To my understanding the biggest problem in Venezuela (and it's a
| big problem) is the terrible living conditions. I don't know how
| much the supposed regime is to blame for that and if a supposed
| good government would have done a better job. Maybe a good
| goverment would have still managed a country with poor living
| conditions for the majority. But we wouldn't hear about it in the
| news because The West has labelled it as a good government. (How
| selective is the reporting on countries with bad living
| conditions?)
|
| I read the bio. I don't know enough about Venezuela to judge
| whether she is a pro-democracy fighter or just another politician
| who wants power for herself. Certainly you can label any
| candidate pro-democracy if they oppose your most disfavorite
| regime.
|
| So I'm not going to spend two hours researching what the
| Venezuela situation is about and whether this is a good award or
| if it's just trying to stick a thumb in the eye of a regime that
| The West doesn't like. Just so I can argue through six replies
| with five different people about (either) how downtrodden the
| Venezuelans are or how manufactured the outrage against the
| government is. (But you can guess which side I am most likely to
| fall on.)
|
| Wake me up in two weeks when there's a topic on democracy itself.
| And then the tone has shifted from Democracy Uber Alles to
| actually, did you know that Plato the most smartest man in the
| world was skeptical about democracy, actually I think a pseudo-
| democracy where only smart people get to decide would be great,
| actually.
| WhereIsTheTruth wrote:
| CIA congratulating itself
| yucky_facts wrote:
| Peace Deals Under Current Admin (2025-Present)
|
| Date: June 2025 Deal: Rwanda-DRC Peace Agreement Parties: Rwanda,
| DRC Desc: Preliminary White House deal + Qatar ceasefire; ends
| proxy wars over resources. RW troop pullout, DRC disarmament,
| investment. US Role: Trump-brokered; signed late June, impl.
| July. Fragile per critics.
|
| Date: July 2025 Deal: Cambodia-Thailand Ceasefire Parties:
| Cambodia, Thailand Desc: Truce halting border skirmishes (40+
| killed, 300k displaced); med. by Malaysia w/ US-China input.
| Tackles old border disputes. US Role: Trump supported via leader
| calls; started July 28, but accusations of violations linger.
|
| Date: July 2025 Deal: Egypt-Ethiopia Peace Accord Parties: Egypt,
| Ethiopia Desc: De-escalates Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam
| tensions; water-sharing & security coop to avoid Nile conflict.
| US Role: US shuttle diplomacy; fits African stability efforts.
|
| Date: July 2025 Deal: India-Pakistan Truce Parties: India,
| Pakistan Desc: Renews/expands Line of Control ceasefire; cuts
| firing, opens econ corridors. US Role: Personal Trump calls;
| credited w/ averting nuclear risks.
|
| Date: July 2025 Deal: Israel-Iran Rapprochement Parties: Israel,
| Iran Desc: Econ normalization & de-escalation; security
| guarantees, less proxy fights in Syria/Yemen. US Role: Brokered
| post-Iran nuclear pressure; called a "major stride" for
| stability.
|
| Date: August 8, 2025 Deal: Armenia-Azerbaijan Peace Declaration
| Parties: Armenia, Azerbaijan Desc: Ends 35+ yr Nagorno-Karabakh
| war; White House-signed. Creates "Trump Route" (TRIPP) corridor
| for trade/energy, cuts Russian sway. US Role: Trump hosted &
| negotiated; boosts Caucasus transit/resources.
|
| Date: October 8, 2025 Deal: Israel-Hamas Gaza Ceasefire (Phase 1
| of 20/21-Point Plan) Parties: Israel, Hamas (med. Egypt/Qatar/US)
| Desc: Ends 2-yr war: ~100 hostages freed by Oct 13, prisoner
| swaps, troop pullback to pre-2023 lines, 72-hr truce. Long-term:
| Hamas disarm, Gaza rebuild under intl board (Trump chairs). US
| Role: Trump's big win; Kushner/Witkoff finalized in Egypt. Hailed
| as "everlasting peace."
| cynicalpeace wrote:
| I sincerely pray that Maria Corina achieves her goals. Incredible
| bravery. I'm pretty sure she remains in hiding in Venezuela to
| this day
|
| My "acid test" for whether or not someone on the left actually
| cares about freedom, democracy, etc is whether or not they
| support the Maduro government
|
| There's a shocking amount of people who do!
| groos wrote:
| Any meaning associated with the Nobel Peace Prize was demolished
| when Obama got it without having done anything meaningful except
| running a campaign on 'Hope'. This was the person that
| subsequently ok'd 3,000+ drone strikes in Afghanistan, a huge
| number of which caused heavy collateral damage. Imho, the Nobel
| Peace Prize should have no money associated with it and be given
| only posthumously.
| mjd wrote:
| Pretty sure they had already spoiled it by giving it to F.W. de
| Klerk, Yasser Arafat, and Henry Kissinger.
| yandrypozo wrote:
| oh wow I didn't know about those figures getting the price,
| super crazy!!
| aylmao wrote:
| They famously never gave it to Gandhi too, in spite of him
| being nominated 5 times [1]. It's crazy to me that
| Kissinger got it, but not Gandhi.
|
| [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Prize_controversie
| s#Maha...
| roncesvalles wrote:
| Truly wild. Gandhi lived and breathed peace, almost to a
| fault. Kissinger is one of the last people on Earth among
| his contemporary to deserve it.
| SAI_Peregrinus wrote:
| Kissinger's actions lead to a whole hell of a lot of
| people achieving the peace of the grave. I don't think
| that's what Alfred Nobel had in mind for the prize.
| mavelikara wrote:
| And Aung San Suu Kyi.
| portaouflop wrote:
| Insane that Kissinger got it
| bilbo0s wrote:
| Yeah.
|
| I gotta agree. I'm not sure Obama was the straw that broke
| the camel's back in that particular regard.
|
| That said, it depends on how old you are. I think there are a
| lot of young people on HN, and for them, maybe that was a
| meaningful indication of a purportless Nobel Peace Prize?
|
| Some slightly older than them may have checked out with the
| whole Aung San Suu Kyi - Arafat - de Klerk thing.
|
| They don't really attach much import to that prize in any
| case because of the bad taste those picks left in their
| mouths.
|
| I guess I mean that every generation kind of learns anew
| that, "Hey.. wow, this prize doesn't really mean what it did
| even 60 years ago."
|
| It's definitely the Nobel Prize that's the most politically
| biased and least merited by winners at the median over the
| last 30-40 years.
| pciexpgpu wrote:
| Can some ELI5 why Kissinger gets the heat all the time these
| days?
|
| Asking genuinely as a person who is not familiar with the US
| political climate before the 90s...
| dc396 wrote:
| A subset of the criticisms on Kissinger:
|
| * Vietnam War and Bombing of Cambodia: Kissinger played a
| key role in the secret bombing of Cambodia and the
| escalation of U.S. involvement in Southeast Asia, which
| expanded the conflict, resulted in significant civilian
| casualties, and destabilized the region, enabling the rise
| of the Khmer Rouge and contributing to mass deaths.
|
| * Bangladesh Genocide (1971): Kissinger and President Nixon
| strongly supported Pakistan's military dictatorship during
| its violent suppression of Bangladesh's independence
| movement, despite well-documented human rights abuses and
| U.S. officials' warnings about atrocities.
|
| * Support for Dictatorships and Coups in Latin America: He
| was instrumental in U.S. support for right-wing military
| coups, notably the 1973 ouster of Chile's democratically
| elected president Salvador Allende, and the subsequent
| support for General Pinochet's regime, which was
| responsible for widespread human rights violations.
| Kissinger also backed Operation Condor, a campaign of
| repression and assassination by South American
| dictatorships.
|
| * Indonesia and East Timor: Kissinger has been implicated
| in supporting Indonesia's 1975 invasion of East Timor,
| which led to widespread killings and humanitarian abuses.
|
| * Undermining U.S. Principles and Rule of Law: Kissinger's
| tenure saw numerous secret operations and violations of
| U.S. and international law, including illegal arms
| transfers and covert interference in foreign elections and
| governments.
|
| * Sabotaging Vietnam Peace Talks: He was accused of
| interfering with peace negotiations in 1968, potentially
| prolonging the Vietnam War for political gain.
| pciexpgpu wrote:
| Thank you, TIL.
| mcmcmc wrote:
| He was a war criminal and a Nixon crony who among other
| things started the US practice of overthrowing
| democratically elected regimes to install US backed
| military juntas
| astura wrote:
| These days? Kissinger has always had public critics. In
| fact, in 1973 two members of the Nobel Committee resigned
| in protest.
|
| Anyways, the first couple paragraphs of his Wikipedia is an
| introduction.
|
| >Kissinger is also associated with controversial U.S.
| policies including its bombing of Cambodia, involvement in
| the 1971 Bolivian and 1973 Chilean coup d'etats, and
| support for Argentina's military junta in its Dirty War,
| Indonesia in its invasion of East Timor, and Pakistan
| during the Bangladesh Liberation War and Bangladesh
| genocide.[6] Considered by many American scholars to have
| been an effective secretary of state,[7] Kissinger was also
| accused by critics of war crimes for the civilian death
| toll of the policies he pursued and for his role in
| facilitating U.S. support for authoritarian regimes.[8][9]
| kiddico wrote:
| While I completely agree with the loss of actual meaning,
| however I do think it's nice that we tell people they did well
| while they're still alive. Assuming they did actually do
| something to deserve it that is.
| BolexNOLA wrote:
| Obama can't possibly be the catalyst for your disregard of the
| NPP. There were far more controversial picks for decades prior.
|
| This obsession with Obama's award is just further evidence Fox
| News decides what we recall and get angry about. It comes up
| _every single year_. It's a meme at this point. Obama but not
| Arafat or Kissinger? Get out of here lmao
| sys32768 wrote:
| Arafat and Rabin received it for "their efforts to create
| peace in the Middle East."
|
| Kissinger and Le Duc Tho received it because they "jointly
| worked for a ceasefire and for bringing peace to Vietnam,"
| though Le Duc Tho refused it and Kissinger did not attend the
| ceremony.
|
| Obama received it nine months into his Presidency for
| "extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy
| and cooperation between peoples," despite having few if any
| concrete foreign policy achievements.
|
| Obama could have at least matched Kissinger by ducking the
| ceremony, or even by refusing it like Le Duc Tho did because
| it wasn't justified.
| BolexNOLA wrote:
| I'm not saying I agree with his getting it but the amount
| of attention it has gotten and continues to get 17 years
| later is absolutely ridiculous
| bilbo0s wrote:
| Amazing that we're actually debating which of the warlords
| created the most peace per fatality inflicted in a
| discussion on the merits of their Nobel Peace Prizes.
|
| That alone, in a sane world, would tell you these people
| had no business having a Nobel Peace Prize. At least
| Kissinger and Le Duc Tho had the common decency not to
| stand at that podium. Most of those other Nobel Peace Prize
| winners did not have that kind of self awareness.
| BolexNOLA wrote:
| Thank you, you're making my point far better than I am.
| The entire discussion is out of whack.
| cosmicgadget wrote:
| > obsession with Obama's award
|
| It is amazing how many hits you get when you Ctrl+F 'Obama'
| on this post.
| lyu07282 wrote:
| In the context of Trump trying to get one too, isn't that
| pretty obvious to bring up? Perhaps we could talk about
| Jimmy Carter's war crimes too, he got a peace nobel as
| well. Committing war crimes is a bit like breathing for US
| presidents.
| etyhhgfff wrote:
| To be fair, the Obama administration specifically designed
| rockets that did not carry high explosives, but rather sharp
| blades intended to kill individuals with minimal risk of
| collateral damage.
| josefresco wrote:
| You didn't draw the line at Henry Kissinger, Yasser Arafat or
| even the European Union itself?!?
| 1718627440 wrote:
| Do you object to the EU? This was very much founded as a
| peace project.
| jonathanstrange wrote:
| A very successful one so far. The current probability of a
| war between EU states should be close to 0.
| jeltz wrote:
| The EU is one of the most worthy winners if we read Nobel's
| will.
| notepad0x90 wrote:
| If you're looking at it like how an athlete would get a gold
| medal, maybe? Even then, the fact that an unqualified person
| (such as with doping and cheating) was given a medal, doesn't
| take away from someone's accomplishment.
|
| But back on Obama, was your expectation that he wouldn't hurt a
| fly? Did he start a war? Did he not set the stage for
| withdrawing from two wars (both justified imho!)? Did he order
| the killing of anyone who wasn't a legitimate military target?
| I'm not saying he should have been given any award, and
| certainly his was premature, but it is hardly without
| precedent.
|
| The peace prize is given to leaders who worked towards peace.
| It gives them recognition, sort of like a pat on the back so
| they won't give up.
|
| Would you rather a retired politician get the prize so he can
| boast about it? or an active politician so that he now has the
| prize as a reminder of their promises and work towards peace?
|
| He said it best:
|
| "Throughout history, the Nobel Peace Prize has not just been
| used to honor specific achievement; it's also been used as a
| means to give momentum to a set of causes," Obama said. "And
| that is why I will accept this award as a call to action--a
| call for all nations to confront the common challenges of the
| 21st century."
|
| Either way, in retrospect, him winning an election is in the
| long term arguably, and to no fault of his own, a catastrophe.
| But the US did pull out of Iraq and Afghanistan, and conflicts
| in Syira, Libya and all over the world sprung that were too
| easy for the US to be involved in but the US didn't. The US
| military responded to various natural disasters providing
| crucial aid, such as with the 2011 Haiti earthquake.
|
| I think this sentiment is held largely by people who don't want
| to be bothered by nuance and who have an immature concept of
| peace, one that doesn't involve violence or military action
| (despite concepts like "peace keeping force" existing).
| krustyburger wrote:
| The US did not pull out of Afghanistan under Obama.
| ToDougie wrote:
| A minor detail, surely.
| notepad0x90 wrote:
| I said eventually, and he did set the stage for the pull
| out. he could have done the opposite and established longer
| term commitments. Honestly, my view is that both countries
| should have been incorporated as US territories. $20tn is
| not a small amount, and by virtue of being the aggressors,
| they've lost their right to self-rule (yes, even in without
| wmd's Saddam was taunting support for US's enemies).
| krustyburger wrote:
| Giving him credit for something executed under an
| administration two presidencies later seems like a bit of
| a stretch in any case.
|
| But especially in this specific case, where he actually
| presided over a dramatic US escalation in Afghanistan:
|
| https://www.afghanistanwarcommission.senate.gov/press-
| releas...
| ToDougie wrote:
| I would prefer if awards were given to people for something
| they achieved, not for something they promised to achieve.
|
| The Arab Spring did not occur in a vacuum. If you're
| satisfied with America's public or private involvement,
| great. General Wesley Clark has a rather infamous interview
| from 2007 that you may want to consider.
|
| Anyways, I think Trump is better motivated by _not_ giving
| him the Peace Prize.
| notepad0x90 wrote:
| Trump is a jerk. and he makes a million promises and keeps
| like 10. He isn't the type of person that is afraid of
| looking bad because he broke a promise, he's more likely to
| use a peace prize to justify violence because after all, it
| has to be someone else's fault since he has a peace prize
| awarded to him.
|
| Maybe there should be other prizes for life time
| achievement or something, but the Nobel committee seems to
| be intent on promoting peace instead of giving kudos to
| someone.
|
| I think neither obama or trump qualify, even to promote
| peace. it implies that they are law makers. in the US, the
| president is supposed to be an executive that takes
| actions, not a legislator that has the power to start or
| end wars. Treat them like kings and be surprised when one
| of them dumb enough to think he actually is one starts
| acting like it. that's the state of things unfortunately.
| russellbeattie wrote:
| > _...he makes a million promises and keeps like 10._
|
| Depends on who he's making the promises to.
|
| _Everything_ he promised during the election in terms of
| vengeance, hatred, ignorance, bigotry, etc. as enumerated
| in Project 2025 has been fulfilled as promised to a T, or
| is on its way.
|
| In fact, from that perspective, I'd say he's kept more
| promises and acted more quickly on them than any other
| president in history. As long as the promise includes
| cruelty or injustice, he is as good as his word.
| UncleOxidant wrote:
| > Either way, in retrospect, him winning an election is in
| the long term arguably, and to no fault of his own, a
| catastrophe.
|
| Due to the right-wing backlash against a black president?
|
| I don't view his winning as the catastrophe, I view it as
| leading to a revelation about what was just under the
| surface. The catastrophe has been caused by others.
| Arainach wrote:
| >Either way, in retrospect, him winning an election is in the
| long term arguably, and to no fault of his own, a
| catastrophe.
|
| What do you mean by this?
| notepad0x90 wrote:
| I think history would agree eventually that his timing was
| unfortunate. The changes in technology (social media,
| smartphones,etc..) and the 2008 financial crisis culminated
| in large scale social changes and dissatisfaction. That
| along with aging politicians stuck in their old ways was a
| huge challenge. And he could have maybe overcome all that
| except for the fact that even in Obama's own lifetime, half
| the country didn't want black people to have the same
| rights as whites, so he had to deal with the racism.
|
| It all comes down to money and the gravity center of
| finance. Those who wanted in on commerce and rising wealth
| used racial attacks against him to inflame a discontent
| society, and the figurehead of that inflammation seized
| power. As they say, "America sneezes and the rest of the
| world catches cold", it would have been britain,
| ottomans,hispania, portugal, baghdad,ctesiphon,
| karakorum,venice,rome,etc.. in different times of history.
| but it is the US now, and as a result the world caught the
| fascism fever. I think that means Obama inadvertently was
| instrumental in the collapse of US-centric world older and
| in the shifting of center of gravity once again. I don't
| see beijing picking up the slack, it would be less chaotic
| if it were that simple. but i'm concerned the US itself
| won't make it till the end of this decade and I don't know
| what will come afterwards.
|
| China has been in times past set to take on the throne but
| they've been complacent and isolationist. That I think
| means a contraction of US's reach and influence with an
| unfilled vacuum, starting in Europe and spanning the globe.
| It might be decades before there is any kind of stability.
| It's basically wealthy people of the west not wanting to
| accept reality that's keeping things afloat so far.
|
| If McCain won in '08 and Obama won in '12, the swing may
| have been wildly different. If Romney won '12 there
| wouldn't be a trump admin. You'll notice that a lot of
| people agree that things started going really bad around
| 2013-15, that's on Obama's second term, after the snowden
| leaks. Brexit and other far right movements also peaked
| then. He isn't responsible and he didn't mean to, but the
| current state of things wouldn't have occurred without him.
|
| One thing he could have helped though. He could have
| avoided making fun of an insecure billionaire at the white
| house correspondent's dinner. and that certain billionaire
| (with a long documented history of discriminating against
| blacks and working for the russians), wouldn't have made it
| his mission in life to dismantle reverting that represented
| Obama.
| Arainach wrote:
| There's never a "right time". This is akin to arguing
| that LBJ passing the Civil Rights Act was "a
| catastrophe". Sure, it energized generations of racists
| to become angry, flip the south, abuse the filibuster,
| and cause lots of pain, but these people never go away,
| and if the choice is "no progress" or "progress with some
| pain" the latter is very much preferable.
|
| The sentiment wasn't because of Obama, it was because of
| the Koch brothers and others like them funneling billions
| to corrupt American discourse.
|
| Over decades they funded conservative think tanks and
| academia to make their libertarian ideals more widely
| accepted. They funded the tea party and divisive
| mentalities. Others like Rupert Murdoch built up media
| empires to drive lies, outrage, and manufactured stories
| to build anti-government sentiment. None of that was
| Obama's doing.
| hypeatei wrote:
| Why does Trump want it so badly if it's just an award given to
| war mongers and drone strikers then?
| portaouflop wrote:
| There is only one possible explanation...
| cosmicgadget wrote:
| ... the one guy who made fun of him at a comedy dinner has
| one and he doesn't.
| cosmicgadget wrote:
| To paraphrase the Nobel writeup: he advocated international
| cooperation, denuclearization, social progress, and work to
| reverse climate change.
|
| This was against the backdrop of a president who lied to the UN
| so he could depose a dictator, initiated ground invasions of
| two countries, had a VP who openly advertised that he was okay
| with doing evil stuff to accomplish his objectives - e.g. Gitmo
| and Abu Graib, and created a regulatory environment that led to
| the GFC.
|
| That prize was awarded to Obama but it was meant for the US
| electorate for embracing what you reductively call "hope".
| mastodon_acc wrote:
| This is such a highly disingenuous bad faith argument, Obama
| won it in 2009, are you suggesting the Nobel committee should
| have used some time travel technology to peer into the future?
| dh2022 wrote:
| I was going to say Nobel Prize for Peace was irretrievably
| compromised when they gave it to Kissinger.
| enbugger wrote:
| Instead of Trump, they decided to award a democratic party asset
| that's relevant to current agenda. Just to piss him off
| apparently.
| gcanyon wrote:
| I wonder if she would rather _not_ have won it? Being the focus
| of frustration of someone with enormous capacity to thwart your
| efforts or even destroy your country can 't be a pleasant
| position to be in. For her sake I hope he quickly finds something
| else to be pissed off about.
| raffael_de wrote:
| "This recognition of the struggle of all Venezuelans is a boost
| to conclude our task: to conquer Freedom. We are on
| the threshold of victory and today, more than ever, we count on
| President Trump, the people of the United States, the peoples of
| Latin America, and the democratic nations of the world as our
| principal allies to achieve Freedom and democracy. I
| dedicate this prize to the suffering people of Venezuela and to
| President Trump for his decisive support of our cause!
|
| https://xcancel.com/MariaCorinaYA/status/1976642376119549990
| NoGravitas wrote:
| She just dedicated her award to Trump, lmao.
| gigatexal wrote:
| It made my day a 100x better that they didn't cave and give it to
| Trump. Him sewing division at home is grounds for impeachment I'd
| hope but congress doesn't function anymore so.
| nwhnwh wrote:
| Oh, my dear corrupt Nobel prize. I love oil too.
| standardUser wrote:
| Before authoritarian rule, Venezuela was one of the wealthiest
| nations in the global South (if not one of the wealthiest period
| in the 50-60s). Then Chavez came along and stacked the courts
| with lackeys, intimidated critical media outlets and harassed
| journalists, diverted state spending for political patronage,
| demanded loyalty oaths from underlings, injected "Bolivarian"
| ideology into schools and sports, took control of private
| industry...
|
| I'd tell you what he did to elections but we'll all find out soon
| enough.
| 7874cole wrote:
| Nobel Peace of Shit.
| moralestapia wrote:
| https://x.com/leadingreport/status/1976662248887402924?s=46
|
| Uh oh! Time to flip the switch! Mega-LMAO.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-10-10 23:01 UTC)