Nobel Peace Prize Laureate is….

[Klaus]

I just think the whole Peace prize has become a joke. It has been way over-used as an instrument to affect certain political changes - always in the same direction - and not as a recognition for actual accomplishements. The sad climax of this development was probably when they gave it to Obama.

[jon-nyc]

I’m still pissed they didn’t give it to me.

Like Obama, I also wasn’t George W Bush.

[Axtremus]

Maybe give it to Greta?

[jon-nyc]

Is there a prize for most obnoxious selfie seeker?

[Axtremus]

You can start one!

[LuFins Dad]

The Trump nominations weren’t related to the newest Israel/Palestinian Peace Deal. They were based on ending the India/Pakistan conflict, The Congo and Rwanda Settlement, The Cambodia/Thailand Ceasefire, the Armenia/Azerbaijan settlement, and the earlier temporary ceasefire in Gaza.

So kindly let me know who has accomplished more this year, and that’s excluding the current peace plan in Gaza…

[jon-nyc]

You obviously haven’t been following Greta on instagram.

[jon-nyc]

@LuFins-Dad said in Nobel Peace Prize Laureate is….:

So kindly let me know who has accomplished more this year, and that’s excluding the current peace plan in Gaza…

Seems like you have to subtract points for claiming Ukraine started the war, no?

Or saying that Russia ‘earned’ land in Ukraine?

I mean you have to look at everything they did, don’t you?

[Horace]

The committee doesn't publish its fishbone analysis of root cause for nobel prizes.

[LuFins Dad]

@jon-nyc said in Nobel Peace Prize Laureate is….:

@LuFins-Dad said in Nobel Peace Prize Laureate is….:

So kindly let me know who has accomplished more this year, and that’s excluding the current peace plan in Gaza…

Seems like you have to subtract points for claiming Ukraine started the war, no?

Or saying that Russia ‘earned’ land in Ukraine?

I mean you have to look at everything they did, don’t you?

Sure thing. Do how much worse did that make the war? How many more lives did it cost for the tally?

[jon-nyc]

It’s too soon to say and even in hindsight would be speculative.

[LuFins Dad]

So 0, as far as you know. Got it. Thanks.

[jon-nyc]

I can’t prove to you it won’t be 1,000,000 and I can’t prove to you it won’t be zero. Putin may well be one creative compliment away from getting back maga support.

[LuFins Dad]

~~So how well did the UN’s approach of calling Putin a War Criminal and a monster in countless proclamations work in getting Putin to the table? ~~

So your answer is 0 holiday, but you reserve the right to still use it as a pointless argument because it might someday win you points. Got it.

[Horace]

@LuFins-Dad said in Nobel Peace Prize Laureate is….:

~~So how well did the UN’s approach of calling Putin a War Criminal and a monster in countless proclamations work in getting Putin to the table? ~~

So your answer is 0 holiday, but you reserve the right to still use it as a pointless argument because it might someday win you points. Got it.

Tuning into these rhetorical frequencies is a long and unpleasant process.

[jon-nyc]

@LuFins-Dad said in Nobel Peace Prize Laureate is….:

So your answer is 0 holiday, but you reserve the right to still use it as a pointless argument because it might someday win you points. Got it.

I don’t even understand this sentence so pick your mic back up.

One imagines that violating international law by bombing commercial boats and threatening historic allies over their territory would be on the negative side of the ledger as well. Not even mentioning his effective declaration of war on various American cities.

[Doctor Phibes]

If nothing else I'm sure we can all agree that Trump is the moral victor in the fight for the Peace Prize.

[Horace]

@jon-nyc said in Nobel Peace Prize Laureate is….:

@LuFins-Dad said in Nobel Peace Prize Laureate is….:

So your answer is 0 holiday, but you reserve the right to still use it as a pointless argument because it might someday win you points. Got it.

I don’t even understand this sentence so pick your mic back up.

It might have some vague connection to this sort of progression. On one day, be the sort of person who writes a thoughtful critique of why appropriating dramatic words is rhetorically cheating, and bad for discourse in general:

https://nodebb.the-new-coffee-room.club/post/349345

Honestly it’s like calling a glance at a black woman’s hair ‘white supremacy’.

You take a word with a well understood and emotionally charged meaning and apply it to something very different with the hopes of getting some of the stink of the word on the new thing.

Of course it also cheapens the word if you’re successful.

Then on the next day, maybe say that Trump is "effectively declaring war on American cities".

[jon-nyc]

Well he’s declaring them to be in a state of war, whatever that means, on the theory that that allows him to send troops in to offer violence to his political enemies.

Thats a lot more words but still falls on the opposite side of the Nobel laureate ledger.

[Horace]

@jon-nyc said in Nobel Peace Prize Laureate is….:

Well he’s declaring them to be in a state of war, whatever that means, on the theory that that allows him to send troops in to offer violence to his political enemies.

Thats a lot more words but still falls on the opposite side of the Nobel laureate ledger.

So in an economy of words, you sacrificed detail, in order to enhance communication. The dramatic word choice of "declare war on American cities" happens to be pretty damning to the politician you hate, but that was incidental. Your goal was simplified communication. Thank you for your explanation. I am now disabused of the notion that you often use bs rhetoric to support whatever point you're making that day, even though you're more than capable of arguing intelligently about why your bs rhetoric is bs.

Occam might think that you just have a point of view, and you don't really care about the quality of rhetoric you will employ to convince people of it. But Occam's problem is that you haven't explained everything to him.