10 ms·

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 venezuel

• yostrovs 11mo ago
  [flagged]
  • madacol 11mo ago
    ... and yet the consequences of what's going is as if there was war, the economy is suffering as if there was war, the people are fleeing as if there was war and dying as if there was war You don't need a war to have a lack of Peace!
    • yostrovs 11mo ago
      But then there are dozens of impoverished and unjust places on earth. I think the reality is that the five exclusively Norwegian politicians on the Peace prize committee are politicians. And they act accordingly. What if the committee would consist of Russian politicians exclusively, or Venezuelan ones?
      • ivell 11mo ago
        Nobel peace prize was always political. Obama got it. Gandhi was rejected.
        • dotancohen 11mo ago
          This has confused me for long enough. What specific action did Obama do to be awarded the Nobel peace prize?
          • fifilura 11mo ago
            It was probably premature. But the relation between USA and the Arabic states were on an all time low after the Bush Crusade. And Obama reached out to fix the relations. This is my recollection of it. But i can agree that the rushed decision created problems afterwards for the committee. Like today when it is questioned.
            • zimpenfish 11mo ago
              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Nobel_Peace_Prize https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Nobel_Peace_Prize > The 2009 Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to United States president Barack Obama (b. 1961) for his "extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples".
            • markjenkinswpg 11mo ago
              Interesting summary. The relationship with some Arab speaking states has had some recent relevance.
          • Master_Odin 11mo ago
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Nobel_Peace_Prize https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Nobel_Peace_Prize provides a good overview of why he got the award and the surrounding controversy.
            • dotancohen 11mo ago
              - Promotion of nuclear nonproliferation. - Reaching out to the Muslim world. I see. Thank you.
          • peterfirefly 11mo ago
            Obama and Gore both got it for not being Bush.
            • Zigurd 11mo ago
              I can remember when that was a huge contrast.
      • Zigurd 11mo ago
        The difference between whataboutism and discussion is that in discussion you propose an alternative. For example: how about that real estate developer who has fumbled multiple diplomatic initiatives? That would be a basis for discussion.
      • mcphage 11mo ago
        > But then there are dozens of impoverished and unjust places on earth. They only give out one prize, which means that no matter which they pick, there will be dozes of impoverished and unjust places that don't get recognized by it. That can't be used to reject a choice, since it's true no matter what choice they make.
    • lentil_soup 11mo ago
      to add to your comment, check out the list of the biggest refugee crises: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_refugee_crises https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_refugee_crises Venezuela is number 5 by the number of displaced people, the rest are all wars, it's crazy for a country at peace
  • ErneX 11mo ago
    There’s kidnapping, imprisonment, torture and rape of political dissidents. They created an exodus of 8 million people. Starved the population. Killed people in the thousands in the favelas and other poor areas without a trial. Steals elections. To me that’s a regime at war with its own population and it deserves all the condemnation possible and all the support necessary to help transition back to democracy.
    • pydry 11mo ago
      What he is being accused of is a tiny fraction of what has been proven to have taken place in Gaza, under the protection of the west. Yet the aircraft carriers are poised in the gulf to enact a third regime change operation in this oil rich country America wants under its thumb with a puppet running it. This is the PR campaign beforehand, just like the "WMD" PR campaign in the run up to Iraq, with a woman who supports genocide in Gaza (https://x.com/VenteVenezuela/status/1286346531591852036 https://x.com/VenteVenezuela/status/1286346531591852036 ) being lauded with a nobel peace prize. This is probably to lend her legitimacy when she becomes that puppet. Saddam was a bad man too but he was an average evil. The warmongers who want to destabilize every country with oil, send in the tanks and install yet another Western puppet to maintain an iron grip on global oil supplies are a very special and unique kind of evil.
      • ErneX 11mo ago
        I’m not going to engage in a competition of tragedies. You are replying to a venezuelan with relatives and friends that have suffered and still suffer the consequences of the regime. Just stop and think for a moment before even think about downplaying or comparing what is happening in my country with other world conflicts, and please don’t even dare to explain what I’ve been living.
        • pydry 11mo ago
          [flagged]
          • 11mo ago
  • bmmayer1 11mo ago
    Who would you give the Nobel Peace Prize to?
    • DSingularity 11mo ago
      Is that even a question!? Ben Gvir, Smotrich, or Mileikowsky. For raising the bar so high.
      • peterfirefly 11mo ago
        That would be far worse than Kissinger.
        • megous 11mo ago
          Not yet.
        • DSingularity 11mo ago
          I was being sarcastic but definitely happy to see the down votes.
    • delichon 11mo ago
      From the New York Times "The Daily" podcast today: Mark, what you've described and what we're seeing unfold is genuinely an impressive feat by Trump. To be able to capitalize on what seemed like this giant setback. Israel literally bombed the negotiators and the mediators. To turn that around and get a deal that Biden couldn't get done, that no other leader in the world had managed despite trying for two years straight. It is significant achievement. He was able to bring these sides together that had shown no willingness to end the war. And now they've come to this agreement. And it should also be said that one of the biggest things here is that he was willing to put pressure on Netanyahu in a way that President Biden was unwilling to do. Why do you think that's the case? I think there's a few reasons. First, I think Trump genuinely wanted to end the war. He campaigned on ending the war in Ukraine and in Gaza. Too late for this year, but if it holds it should be considered for next year.
  • 379222816227273 11mo ago
    [flagged]
    • nelsnelson 11mo ago
      Obvious false equivalency fallacy. Everyone you don't like is Hitler. Democracy is not just when more than one "party". Just because a fascist or fascist adjacent party is disallowed, does not mean democracy is absent.
      • deleted 11mo ago
        [deleted]
  • markjenkinswpg 11mo ago
    Consider this. There are circumstances in Venezuela that some would consider worthy of a civil war. This award winner has chosen peaceful resistance, acts that may have prevented war.
  • jeltz 11mo ago
    You may think that but Alfred Nobel disagreed and it is his prize. If she fits the criteria is another question but it was certainly not intended to just be about real wars and real peace (whatever that is). den som har verkat mest eller best för folkens förbrödrande och afskaffande eller minskning af stående arméer samt bildande och spridande af fredskongresser 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 English translation is taken from Wikipedia and not totally exact but close enough.
    • johanvts 11mo ago
      Relevant in this context: The translation introduces “nations” , but the original talks about peace between “people”.
      • jeltz 11mo ago
        I would say that is likely a correct translation as the original text refers to nation as in a group of people with a shared culture. But, yes, it is not nation as in country. So the original text refers to fraternity between peoples of different cultures, not of fraternity between countries. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation
    • littlestymaar 11mo ago
      How is the quote contradicting GP's position? From the quote it doesn't seem like Alfred Nobel had civil or political rights in mind with his prize. (Not that it bothers me to give it to civil rights activists though)
      • jeltz 11mo ago
        It does because Alfred Nobel cared about internationalism and pacifism, neither "real wars" nor civil rights. I did not say she was a worthy winner just that we should look at what the will actually says instead of just inventing an own definition.
  • raverbashing 11mo ago
    I don't know honestly if some people feed on negative attention or if they just live their life trying to fit square pegs into round holes
  • dtech 11mo ago
    I would rather give the "Fire Safety" prize to the people who installed sprinklers and smoke alarms than to firefighters
    • ineedasername 11mo ago
      And what does that look like in this context, eligible countries that haven’t been at war in a while get together at pat each other on the back?
      • strix_varius 11mo ago
        That misses the analogy. Such countries already have not only smoke alarms but also building codes and layers of safety systems. The analogy matches a person who goes to a place with high fire risk and no safety systems in place and through tireless effort introduces common sense measures to protect people.
        • ineedasername 11mo ago
          No, it doesn’t miss the analogy, it questions the applicability of the analogy by asking that it be tied back more completely to the circumstances at play. Analogies are valuable rhetorical devices only in so far as they map to the salient aspects of the comparative target. In this case, either there is a target group to receive the awards, the those doing the safety work, or there is not. In the later case, the analogy is invalidated unless the resulting conclusion is something like “and so we shouldn’t have an award like this because it would just be a strange thing to do” or something along those lines that equally ties the analogy back to the real world.
• jmyeet 11mo ago
  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 11mo ago
    what interest does north korea threaten?
    • VerminOctopus1 11mo ago
      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 11mo ago
        Or rather was a strong ally? I bet you are not imposing 25% tariff to your strong ally.
      • throwawaymaths 11mo ago
        > the interests of Western companies no companies listed. anyways, the beef has gone on longer than there were important south korean companied
  • 11mo ago
• 29athrowaway 11mo ago
  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 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 11mo ago
    > 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 11mo ago
      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.
• lyu07282 11mo ago
  Its like the Iraq war all over again, you gobble this shit up like its sophisticated propaganda. Like she literally went on Fox&Friends to glaze Trump bombing those Venezuelan boats and supports US sanctions hurting her own citizens. You think she is some sort of popular resistance fighter or something? You Americans are so fucking stupid its hilarious.
  • subsection1h 11mo ago
    > You Americans are so fucking stupid its hilarious. LOL. The person you replied to is from Venezuela: https://hn.algolia.com/?query=author:madacol+Venezuela&type=all https://hn.algolia.com/?query=author:madacol+Venezuela&type=...
    • deleted 11mo ago
      [deleted]