The 2014 Nobel Peace Prize will be announced Friday, October 10, at (I think) about 4 AM Eastern. Apparently, the “smart money” is on Pope Francis, but in light of the committee’s recent habit of using it to slam the USA’s government of the day, I wouldn’t put it past them to give it to Edward Snowden.
Is there somebody else reasonably obvious that I am missing?
I don’t see Snowden as a possible recipient. You can approve or disapprove of what he did, but it’s not really furthering “peace among nations” however you view it.
The best suggestion I saw was to not give one this year to anyone.
How about Malala Yousafzai (the Pakistani teenager who was shot for suggesting that it might be nice if girls could get an education)?
BTW, I’m amused when it’s noted that a person was nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize. There’s a long list of people who can submit nominations:
• Members of national assemblies and governments of states
• Members of international courts
• University rectors; professors of social sciences, history, philosophy, law and theology; directors of peace research institutes and foreign policy institutes
• Persons who have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize
• Board members of organizations that have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize
• Active and former members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee
• Former advisers to the Norwegian Nobel Committee
Heck, my own father could nominate me for a Nobel Peace Prize. So there’s no particular honor in being nominated.
Nothing against Il Papa, but if he won, I’d ask the same question I asked when Obama won:
For WHAT? He hasn’t DONE anything yet!!!
Marley23 has done his part to keep the peace.
But other than that, I think I’d agree it’s a good year to pointedly leave it on the shelf. No one has done a standout job of promoting peace over war, vengeance and indifference to suffering caused thereby.
If there’s no obvious nominee, they can always fall back on one of the old standbys, like the The International Committee of the Red Cross (a three-time winner), the International Rescue Committee or UNICEF. Or how about Sam Nunn and the Nuclear Threat Initiative?
Given some of the dubious Peace Prizes that have been handed out over the years (Barak Obama for… uh… we’ll think of something later) I wouldn’t put it past them to give it to Edward Snowden.
I’d give it to the aid workers fighting ebola in Africa.
Agreed. Apart from them - and not just ebola, all of Doctors Without Borders and similar organizations are the first thing I’d want the aliens to see of us - yeah, there’s no obvious person. They’ll probably give it to the Pope for saying that being gay doesn’t always send you straight to Hell if you repress it your whole life. I mean, I’m not saying the guy’s not way better than the last few we’ve had, but he’s not quite the revolutionary some make him out to be.
It would be fun to see Snowden get it, if only to watch everyone’s faces. 
ETA: Oh, and Malala would be AWESOME. I suspect they’ll hold out, though, given that she’s young and has time to do more.
I wouldn’t mind if nobody got it this year, to send a message that the whole peace, love and understanding thing hasn’t really been in people’s minds all that much lately.
I doubt that will happen. As I remember, the nomination process closes in February. (That was one of the things that made Obama’s award so weird; he was nominated after being in office for only a month or so.) Ebola didn’t become an issue until very recently.
I’m almost certain this is my year…
There is a very large number of people in the world who have done something, large or small, to further peace, and to not award the prize would be a slap in the face to all of them. Peace prizes have been awarded to people that none of us were even aware of the existence of, like that guy in Bangladesh who set up a bank to loan startup money to smalll entrepreneurs.
Ding ding! We have a winner. Malala shares with Indian children’s rights activist Kailash Satyarthi.
Hey Dewey, can you list me six numbers from 1 to 40 please?
A decision I think we can all get behind. I don’t know the other winner but Malala is an incredibly impressive young women who every right thinking person should support.
I just hope that the British government steps up the security layer around her. This is so going to piss off the crazy fundamentalists.
What about Obama ?
What about him? It was five years ago. Let it go.
It’s very difficult to argue with the choice. The Nobel Peace Prize is important largely for its symbolism, and she’s a hell of a symbol.
It’s certainly better than giving it to the EU, UNHCR, or some other organization simply for existing and doing what it was designed to do. I don’t mean to denigrate the work of international peace and relief organizations and I donate to CARE and all that, but there’s something less than inspiring about handing an award to an legal person and saying “Good job existing” to… I dunno, the corporate charter? A PERSON can inspire and serve as an example.
Granted, handing the award to a person can result in future embarrassment, as evidenced by the awards given to Barack Obama, Yassir Arafat, Henry Kissinger, and
a few others. But no pain, no gain. Does anyone remember that the Pugwash Conference won the 1995 Nobel Peace Prize? Me neither.
Great choices.
I’m not a fan. For me, the Nobel Prize should go to people based on what they do, not what others do to them, or even what they’ve been through. Malala has certainly done a lot, but I don’t think she’s done that much compared to other activists, or would have won the prize had she not been attacked. If anything, they should’ve learned their mistake with Obama about giving the prize for expected future actions and waited until she had used her new found publicity to accomplish more good.
That being said, the Peace prize has a pretty terrible record, having been given to bona fide terrorists and all.