On Air: Has the Nobel Peace Prize gone to the right man ?

When China threatens you not to do something that doesn't mean it is morally wrong to do it, if it did China would be the moral compass of the world, which it clearly isn't.

Yes of course it as.any one can be a peace activist in the west,i'm one it's easy.to do this in the lions den facing and looking the aggressor in the eyeball,that takes guts, a great love of freedom and a giant spirit of conviction.at the sake of repeating myself,Yes of course...

Nobel peace prize committee for some odd reason is really picking controversial candidates even though I shouldn’t be surprised since in the past they had picked Henry Kissinger and Yasser Arafat.

Like last year they picked Obama and this year Liu Xiaobo, I am of the opinion such a prestigious award should go to someone who has really achieved something v/s people who have a great deal of good writings and speeches. Rhetoric is NOT a substitute for actual work/action.

If this continues the Nobel peace prize might just lose its credibility.

Till now, I'd never heard of Mr. Xiaobo. So I can't really make anything of his win.

But one thing with we've all heard of (at least World news followers) is China's horrendous human rights record. It's surprising they still don't acknowledge how bad their scorecard is.

Certainly five Norwegians can make a wrong choice; but then the Nobel Peace Prize is just medal, and a bit money granted along with fame in some places and infamy in others. Its recipients aren’t assumed into heaven or even canonized. Maybe tweaking some folks’ noses a bit was the whole point. This certainly seems to have been the intent (and fact)last year.
g

Liu Xiaobo is less likely to send 30,000 extra troops into Afghanistan than the winner of last year's Nobel for Peace.

I spent some time in China and saw first hand how oppressive the regime is for anyone who had a spark of creative thinking about the world they live in, how to deal with issues or had any opinion other than the officially sanctioned one about anything, however trivial.
Congratulations to Liu Xiaobo, and kudos to the Nobel prize awarders - what a good choice!!!

He deserves.He has never been selfish.
Critics will always be there, they did the same when obama was nominated last year.

What China thinks in this case is irrelevant. If Mr. Liu has worked to promote peace, then he has worked to promote peace. If Beijing doesn't like that, too bad. I doubt they are going to change any of their human rights practices because of something as minor as this anyway.

Also, the Nobel Peace Prize lost a lot of credibility last year when Obama won it. I remember WHYS even discussing it...a lot of people were saying that he might eventually deserve it, but not yet, as he hadn't really done anything yet.

[Personal details removed by Moderator] I'm a Chinese living in Italy. I also took part in the student demo in 89. I think this award is more than due. I'm very very thankful that the Nobel commitee finally found their courage to do this. I think in the long term this will have a huge impact on pushing China toward political reform and respect of basic human right. Great!Thanks!
Chong

Can anyone tell me how many African freedom fighters were awarded the nobel peace price during Africa's struggle for independence from the european colonial powers.

I don't think it was advisable to have given the prize to Liu Xiaobo while still in prison. I think the Chinese Government is somehow right to have said that this would be against Nobel principles. On the other hand, it is a step forward in recognizing his efforts as a fighter for human rights and democracy in China, really a big blow to China's human rights records. They (Chinese Government) should free him at last, he's an acclaimed Nobel Peace Laurette

Maybe it's just how you phrased today's question, "Has the Nobel Peace Prize gone to the right man?" but I find I take the same exception to your question this year as I did last year. The Nobel Peace Prize is the Committee's choice, hence Mr. Xiaobo IS the right man this year in the Committee's eyes. That other's might disagree - oh well.

One point that seems to go missing from a lot of the criticism about the Committee's choice is that the Nobel Peace Prize Committee is NOT a political organization with political motivations. In a world increasingly preoccupied by political correctness and the implications of one's actions, I find the Committee's independence not only refreshing, but also necessary. If China is offended - oh well. If this leads to further problems inside or outside China - oh well. If the world chooses to no longer respect the Nobel Peace Prize Committee as a world voice - oh well. The Committee is acting with integrity according to its long held precepts; if we are no longer appreciative of those precepts, it is more a statement about us than it is about them.

On Liu Xiaobo:

Look, we are trying to eradicate bullies in schools and societies generally.

Why should we put up with China, the ultimate bully ? They don't like the Nobel Society ? - tough.

Aren't we all tired of power bloc politics by now? It reminds me of Orwell's 1984.

It seem irrelevant whether China likes the award to Liu Xiaobo or not.

In any country, you can make any laws you want. Do they meet international standards or not? If the laws don't meet international standards, by all means criticise China:

(a) for their inadequate laws; and

(b) for locking up their own people to shut them up in contravention of the Chinese Constitution. How crazy is that ?

This is a great improvement over last years pick! I hope it creates an uproar so big in China that it has the effect of slapping the populace on the head, for the shock qualities talked about yesterday.

A nonviolent activist struggling for the rights of the average citizens suffering at the hands of a government, capable of far worse things than just kicking people off their land for the expansion of those far richer, would have my vote.

We need more activists like him in this world!

The fact that so many of these comments reflect on the commentators' personal biases is cause for reflection. Yes, we each have our opinions on most any topic under discussion, but in regard to the choice of Nobel Peace Prize Committee, I think our first response should be to understand the Committee's perspective, rather than criticize according to our parochial view of what is important. I say this because, like last year's choice of President Obama, the choice of Mr. Xiaobo is being criticized because he hasn't achieved his end goal, which supposedly makes him less a person to be honored than a person who carries a score card of ticked off achievements. Is it possible that the Committee values the goals of standard bearers who push us toward a more inclusive and open world, the of these people courage to work toward the fulfillment of these goals no matter the adversaries, and the model this presents to the world as one to be valued as much (or more) as a treaty, etc.? I suggest we first contemplate the Peace Prize winner in light of the Committee's perspective before casting stones, and that we also appreciate whatever new insights and inspiration to action that the Committee's perspective might offer each of us. If one doesn't appreciate the Committee's choice with an open mind, then we as a world need a lot more of such Committee choices until we get the message.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

To the person referring to Mocking governments and cultures. The values of human rights and freedoms in those countries and cultures are not different than any place else. They are just slowly removed over time by criminals, despots and slavers to the point that those peoples hope of having them is totally gone.

That does not mean they do not want them.

@14. At 4:25pm on 08 Oct 2010, Axel wrote

Your opinion would carry weight if it weren't so hypocritical.

From a BBC article regarding China's currency:

"Christina Romer, a former economic adviser to President Obama, said that the Chinese currency is one issue. But there are more. She had one specific example.

China should put in place a healthcare system, so that people save less - because they wouldn't have to worry about paying for treatment. They would then buy more products from the rest of the world.

This BBC debate aired the issues. China's exchange rate policy is an important one and the rest of the world wants change. "

Using your logic, why whould others bully China into doing what they want?

I guess It's all a matter of opinion isn't it? Possibly politicaly motivated?? A Poularity contest?? It's their award and I guess they can give it to who ever they want. The real award and reward is peace and that has never been accomplished and most likely never will. All people have egos, many people are greedy, selfish and power hungry. Especialy people who aspire to be leaders and public figures, it's just the nature of the beast. Unlikly that any person who is NOT motivated by self interest would ascend to a position where thy could inspire peace. Well, Christ but look wat happened to him.

China is all in a huff with this Nobel Prize being awarded to this Chinese national, because this man used his countries own doctine against them. So they have lost face, to the entire western world.

You think they will stand for this? Which Chinese out there who may read this post, has not done all in their power to "restore thier honour"? Yup, you better believe China won't let THIS one go, not without a fight. Which could mean up to and including a "military soulution", as if fighting ever REALLY solved anything?

You see, in the end, the problem with the entire world is pride, and not the good kind of pride. It's the "might makes right" kind of pride, where the country with the biggest stick gets to dictate the terms. Hmmm, not which nation does THAT remind you of? ;P