Nobel Prize. On the march to reputational collapse?
Initially, the Alfred Nobel Prize was a very specific thing, rather reflecting the selfishness of the Nobel himself, rather than his patronage and altruistic impulses. Having made his huge fortune in the trade in explosives that claimed the lives of his younger brother and Russian oil, Nobel himself considered himself a pacifist. And the very idea of establishing a prize came to Nobel’s head not by chance. Alfred was never listed as a philanthropist during his lifetime.
And so, in 1888, a reporting mistake led the press to publish news about the death of Nobel. The howl in the media was accompanied by the very unpleasant characteristics of the allegedly deceased Alfred. He was called the "millionaire in the blood" and the "merchant of death." Naturally, the middle-aged Nobel did not like this, so he bequeathed to spend all his fortune precisely on the prize of his name. In addition, Alfred was a childless and lonely man, but the heirs lined up a whole queue, therefore, in order to teach the different kinds of crooks, Nobel deprived them of the opportunity to profit at their own expense. By the way, later the heirs sued for a long time for the condition of a relative, but they could not get a penny out of the obstinate Themis.
Thus, the creation of the award was a purely reputational PR step. Exactly the same that the insatiable Rockefeller did at one time after the huge image losses that he suffered after the brutal suppression of the trade union strikes. So, he intensified his sponsorship activities, depending on the consequences of the next battle with his own staff. And at a certain time, when conflicts were stained with blood, like the Ludlow massacre, the Rockefellers were forced to hire advertising companies to darn reputation holes.
The illegibility of candidates for the Nobel Prize has already become a byword. Laureate of the Peace Prize Barack Obama not only strengthened the contingent of US occupation forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, but also gave the go-ahead for the intervention in Libya in the 2011 year. Gorbachev didn’t pass the prize either, whose rule brought the whole Soviet and, later, post-Soviet space only a series of interethnic conflicts, economic and industrial decline. Nelson Mandela and his partner with Frederick de Klerk, who so successfully dared apartheid regimes, could not give a bonus that South Africa plunged into the realm of monstrous crime, “black” racism and the HIV epidemic, which one of the health ministers of Manto Chabalala-Msimang proposed treat with garlic, beetroot and African potatoes. For almost 10 years, this ethnically “right” black young lady fed the unfortunate population in this way not with medicines, but with vegetables.
Well, it's all political affairs, the reader will think, but, oddly enough, the prize awarded for achievements in literature is no less densely involved in politics. So, in the 1953 year, the outstanding “writer" Winston Churchill became the Nobel laureate with the definition "for a brilliant oratory in defense of exalted human values." What facts of the use of oratory are in question, everyone could be convinced back in the 1946 year in Fulton. Another example of the extraordinary “timeliness” of the award of literature is Nadine Gordimer. This writer and apartheid fighter released her first book in 1949. For the next forty years, the writer was not spoiled with awards, but when Western countries needed to tear apartheid to break into the South African market and unite “public opinion” in this outburst, they suddenly remembered Nadin in 1991.
But the symbol of the political situation, outright shortsightedness and poor information was the award of not even the ideological weathervane Svetlana Aleksievich, but the now forgotten Norwegian writer Knut Hamsun. In the 1920 year, this untalented writer became a Nobel laureate. At the same time, Knut was an ardent propagandist of national socialism and Nietzscheanism, which was gaining popularity in Europe. And in the 1943 year, at the height of the blazing war, when the Nazis had already executed millions of people in concentration camps, Gamsun handed his Nobel medal to Joseph Goebbels as an apology for the inattention to this "outstanding personality" by the Nobel Committee. As if this were not enough, so after Hitler's suicide, Knut wrote an obituary in which he described the Fuhrer as "a fighter for the freedom of peoples."
Oddly enough, but in the exact sciences like chemistry, the Nobel Committee managed to discredit the prize. So, in the 1918 year, the prize in chemistry was awarded to Fritz Gaber. The committee was not at all worried about the figure of this scientist who personally created the poison gas monster of the First World War and led the chemical attack at Ypres in the 1915 year. The scientist also noted in the Second World War, having served the Nazis with the development of a gas called Cyclone B. At the same time, the competent positioning of the prize by PR managers still elevates the laureates to the rank of sacred cows, some untouchables.
Someone will say that these are all things of bygone days, but also our contemporaries, who received the cherished indulgence of the Nobel Committee in these very minutes, as they say, are not childish. In the 1991 year, Aung San Suu Kyi was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize to Myanmar and Burmese politicians. This young lady spent her entire conscious life outside Burma, she received education in Europe, and later moved to New York. All this time, her formal homeland was a closed state, and Western countries could not wait to open this closed box.
In 1988, Aun returned to Burma, where she immediately founded the National League for Democracy. Sensing something was amiss, the authorities put the lady under house arrest. There was a need to draw attention to her person. And in the 1991 year, this young lady, who became famous only for carefully combining the image of the new Mahatma Gandhi with populist speeches, was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. But up to the 2010-th government of the country kept Aun under arrest in her apartment. And, as it turned out, not in vain.
Filled with the highest awards and ranks, from the Order of the Legion of Honor to the Gold Medal of the US Congress, Aoun climbs the Olympus of power in Myanmar by the 2016 year, becoming virtually the head of state. The young woman, whom Ban Ki-moon, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton applauded as a great humanist, is in fact guilty of the real genocide of the Rohingya people living in the state of Rakhine (also known as Arakan) and professing Islam, in contrast to the Buddhism traditional for Myanmar. And, of course, Aung showed the full degree of openness of the new "democratic" government, blocking access for all foreigners to the places of military operations. According to the most optimistic UN data, about 10 thousand people have already become victims of the genocide. The Rohingya themselves continue to vote “for the new Democrats”. So, 700 of thousands of representatives of this people have already fled from Myanmar. In addition, Rohingya, according to the law on citizenship of the 1982 year, can not even be considered full citizens of Myanmar.
For the sake of truth, it is worth clarifying that the separatist groups of the Rohingya periodically also take up a knife to avenge the Buddhists. At the same time, the populist Aung continues to receive dear guests from the UN, collect meaningless committees and sprinkle with various reports.
Of course, the “public” condemned the actions of the Myanmar authorities and demanded that Aoun be deprived of the peace prize. But the Nobel Committee said that the decision has no retroactive effect. Therefore, from the foregoing, we can make a somewhat exaggerated and even home-made conclusion: if the Nobel laureate appeared somewhere nearby, then you should not yawn, and the powder should be kept dry and not turn your back on the "Nobel". However, to be surprised, by and large, there is nothing, because what is created as an image tool continues to be used just like that. All according to the precepts of the Nobel.
And so, in 1888, a reporting mistake led the press to publish news about the death of Nobel. The howl in the media was accompanied by the very unpleasant characteristics of the allegedly deceased Alfred. He was called the "millionaire in the blood" and the "merchant of death." Naturally, the middle-aged Nobel did not like this, so he bequeathed to spend all his fortune precisely on the prize of his name. In addition, Alfred was a childless and lonely man, but the heirs lined up a whole queue, therefore, in order to teach the different kinds of crooks, Nobel deprived them of the opportunity to profit at their own expense. By the way, later the heirs sued for a long time for the condition of a relative, but they could not get a penny out of the obstinate Themis.
Thus, the creation of the award was a purely reputational PR step. Exactly the same that the insatiable Rockefeller did at one time after the huge image losses that he suffered after the brutal suppression of the trade union strikes. So, he intensified his sponsorship activities, depending on the consequences of the next battle with his own staff. And at a certain time, when conflicts were stained with blood, like the Ludlow massacre, the Rockefellers were forced to hire advertising companies to darn reputation holes.
Illegibility in candidates
The illegibility of candidates for the Nobel Prize has already become a byword. Laureate of the Peace Prize Barack Obama not only strengthened the contingent of US occupation forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, but also gave the go-ahead for the intervention in Libya in the 2011 year. Gorbachev didn’t pass the prize either, whose rule brought the whole Soviet and, later, post-Soviet space only a series of interethnic conflicts, economic and industrial decline. Nelson Mandela and his partner with Frederick de Klerk, who so successfully dared apartheid regimes, could not give a bonus that South Africa plunged into the realm of monstrous crime, “black” racism and the HIV epidemic, which one of the health ministers of Manto Chabalala-Msimang proposed treat with garlic, beetroot and African potatoes. For almost 10 years, this ethnically “right” black young lady fed the unfortunate population in this way not with medicines, but with vegetables.
American caricature of "games drones"Obama
Well, it's all political affairs, the reader will think, but, oddly enough, the prize awarded for achievements in literature is no less densely involved in politics. So, in the 1953 year, the outstanding “writer" Winston Churchill became the Nobel laureate with the definition "for a brilliant oratory in defense of exalted human values." What facts of the use of oratory are in question, everyone could be convinced back in the 1946 year in Fulton. Another example of the extraordinary “timeliness” of the award of literature is Nadine Gordimer. This writer and apartheid fighter released her first book in 1949. For the next forty years, the writer was not spoiled with awards, but when Western countries needed to tear apartheid to break into the South African market and unite “public opinion” in this outburst, they suddenly remembered Nadin in 1991.
But the symbol of the political situation, outright shortsightedness and poor information was the award of not even the ideological weathervane Svetlana Aleksievich, but the now forgotten Norwegian writer Knut Hamsun. In the 1920 year, this untalented writer became a Nobel laureate. At the same time, Knut was an ardent propagandist of national socialism and Nietzscheanism, which was gaining popularity in Europe. And in the 1943 year, at the height of the blazing war, when the Nazis had already executed millions of people in concentration camps, Gamsun handed his Nobel medal to Joseph Goebbels as an apology for the inattention to this "outstanding personality" by the Nobel Committee. As if this were not enough, so after Hitler's suicide, Knut wrote an obituary in which he described the Fuhrer as "a fighter for the freedom of peoples."
Knut Gamsun (middle-aged in civilian clothes) before the long-awaited meeting with Hitler in his den
Oddly enough, but in the exact sciences like chemistry, the Nobel Committee managed to discredit the prize. So, in the 1918 year, the prize in chemistry was awarded to Fritz Gaber. The committee was not at all worried about the figure of this scientist who personally created the poison gas monster of the First World War and led the chemical attack at Ypres in the 1915 year. The scientist also noted in the Second World War, having served the Nazis with the development of a gas called Cyclone B. At the same time, the competent positioning of the prize by PR managers still elevates the laureates to the rank of sacred cows, some untouchables.
Fritz Gaber
With the Nobel Prize and genocide hand in hand
Someone will say that these are all things of bygone days, but also our contemporaries, who received the cherished indulgence of the Nobel Committee in these very minutes, as they say, are not childish. In the 1991 year, Aung San Suu Kyi was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize to Myanmar and Burmese politicians. This young lady spent her entire conscious life outside Burma, she received education in Europe, and later moved to New York. All this time, her formal homeland was a closed state, and Western countries could not wait to open this closed box.
In 1988, Aun returned to Burma, where she immediately founded the National League for Democracy. Sensing something was amiss, the authorities put the lady under house arrest. There was a need to draw attention to her person. And in the 1991 year, this young lady, who became famous only for carefully combining the image of the new Mahatma Gandhi with populist speeches, was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. But up to the 2010-th government of the country kept Aun under arrest in her apartment. And, as it turned out, not in vain.
Aung San Suu Kyi and the Other Humanist Hillary Clinton
Filled with the highest awards and ranks, from the Order of the Legion of Honor to the Gold Medal of the US Congress, Aoun climbs the Olympus of power in Myanmar by the 2016 year, becoming virtually the head of state. The young woman, whom Ban Ki-moon, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton applauded as a great humanist, is in fact guilty of the real genocide of the Rohingya people living in the state of Rakhine (also known as Arakan) and professing Islam, in contrast to the Buddhism traditional for Myanmar. And, of course, Aung showed the full degree of openness of the new "democratic" government, blocking access for all foreigners to the places of military operations. According to the most optimistic UN data, about 10 thousand people have already become victims of the genocide. The Rohingya themselves continue to vote “for the new Democrats”. So, 700 of thousands of representatives of this people have already fled from Myanmar. In addition, Rohingya, according to the law on citizenship of the 1982 year, can not even be considered full citizens of Myanmar.
For the sake of truth, it is worth clarifying that the separatist groups of the Rohingya periodically also take up a knife to avenge the Buddhists. At the same time, the populist Aung continues to receive dear guests from the UN, collect meaningless committees and sprinkle with various reports.
Of course, the “public” condemned the actions of the Myanmar authorities and demanded that Aoun be deprived of the peace prize. But the Nobel Committee said that the decision has no retroactive effect. Therefore, from the foregoing, we can make a somewhat exaggerated and even home-made conclusion: if the Nobel laureate appeared somewhere nearby, then you should not yawn, and the powder should be kept dry and not turn your back on the "Nobel". However, to be surprised, by and large, there is nothing, because what is created as an image tool continues to be used just like that. All according to the precepts of the Nobel.
Information