The holy writings of Jews and Christians appear incredibly insightful as we analyze the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to Barack Obama.
For example, people familiar with the ancient story of Israel's King David will recall that, according to the Jewish scriptures, God would not permit the beloved king to build a temple in Jerusalem because there was blood on his hands and war on his borders. Apparently God -- and David -- noticed something incongruous about a warrior building a temple to a God Who ultimately (if not ironically, at least to God's more modern critics) represented peace. The temple would be built by Solomon, David's son.
That Mr. Obama has called the war in Afghanistan the only "necessary" war -- and in the process of executing that war expanded the fighting into Pakistan -- might have given the Nobel committee pause before that esteemed committee conferred the mantle of peace onto a man who has blood on his hands, even fresh blood. Mr. Rush† Limbaugh, noted American conservative talk-radio 'god,' today pointed out that the Nobel committee has imposed its will on Mr. Obama's foreign affairs: by calling him a man of peace, the committee has assured the world that Mr. Obama cannot act with violence against his neighbors, thus tying his hands (and America's). It is an ingenious ploy, and it will possibly work, especially since it appears Mr. Obama is vain enough to actually accept the award (though deferentially admitting he does not deserve it). He is the change we've been waiting for.
So much for expecting any bellicosity to come from the White House any time soon. Or, I should say, Israel should not expect much assertiveness from this man of peace.
In the Christian New Testament, St. Paul warns his protege Timothy not to award novices with too much praise or responsibility, as this inflates egos, tempts pride, and more often than not leads to tremendous downfalls. Novices are in a vulnerable place: too little praise may discourage them, while too much encourages conceit. What, pray tell, does the awarding of the Noble Peace Prize to a man who has done nothing for peace portend for that man's -- and his supporters' -- egos?
I do not know if Mr. Limbaugh invented the following or whether he was citing something that originated elsewhere, but it does deserve praise for its ingenuity: With the Nobel Peace Prize, Mr. Obama is not only the post-racial president, he's the "post-accomplishment president."
Brilliant! Post-racial, post-partisan, post-imperial and now, post-accomplishment -- that's Mr. Obama in nuce. A person doesn't have to do anything to make great strides. Heck, a person doesn't even have to stride. Words voiced with hope and sincerity -- that's sufficient to be king of the world.
_____________________
I don't know about you, but I have grown weary of hearing about the world's opinion of America. What about America's opinion of the world? If the Nobel committee represents the world's views and opinions, then this writer thinks the "world" a small, petty, and shallow thing. The world shouldn't care whether pre-Obama America saw itself the laughingstock of the world. The world should care that the world as represented by the Nobel committee is the laughingstock of America.
Message to the "world": Don't you know that Barack Obama is an abject mediocrity? Don't you see that he is a mirage, a fiction, an illusion?
Barack Obama, man of peace who sends missiles into Pakistan. Barack Obama, a man awarded for not achieving anything. He's post-violence. He's even post-peace and post-conceit.
Here's to hearing laughter in a thousand tongues.
____________________
A NOTE TO MR. OBAMA
You should politely and courteously reject the award -- in total. Don't delay. Tell us about your initial shock; how you were initially confused by the surprise of the honor and got caught up in the moment. And then say, sincerely and without your typical equivocation, that you cannot and will not accept this award. Honor it as generous, and denounce it as too generous. Reject it as premature, and, without setting any preconditions, tell the world that no Nobel Peace prizes should be given to anyone until there is, in reality and not in aspiration or in theory, a real, lasting, comprehensive and universal peace.
THAT's what a real man of peace should and would do. It is also the sort of thing a novice would not do.
And it's the sort of thing King David actually did.
Peace through dissent.
†On a day like today how could I not listen to what Mr. Limbaugh had to say about the Nobel committee's decision?
©Contratimes/2009. All Rights Reserved.
3 comments:
And to think that Gandhi never won the prize. One time it was reportedly over his stance towards Pakistan. The Nobel Prize site has an article on Gandhi's snubs, here is the link.
Of course, it's not about accomplishments, peaceful or otherwise, it's about political statements. The last three Peace Prizes were awarded to insult George Bush. Were I bush, I'd get three replicas of the prize made and put them on my mantel.
(PS. My nomination for next year's prize is The U.S. Marine Corps)
Cheers.
Gentlemen,
This just in: "Obama Wins Heisman."
And for his compelling display of surprise and humility after learning of his Nobel achievement, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has promised Mr. Obama the award for Best Actor In A Rose Garden Press Conference.
Post a Comment