Not so noble: EU's Peace Prize win sparks debate over legitimacy … The European Union's presidents have received this year's Nobel Peace Prize on behalf of the 27-member group. However, growing numbers of critics have pointed to the EU's economic and foreign policy failures, arguing the prize is undeserved. European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso, European Council President Herman Van Rompuy and President of the European Parliament Martin Schulz have accepted the 930,000-euro ($1.2 million) award on behalf of the EU. – RT
Dominant Social Theme: We didn't know an organization could win a Nobel, but, hey … it's great, anyway. Especially when it's the peace prize! Ignore the gripers …
Free-Market Analysis: When the winner of this year's Nobel Peace Prize was announced as the EU, the entire press corps (those in attendance) reportedly let out a united groan. This was certainly an unusual reaction for the top reporters of a bought-and-paid-for press.
Coming after a previous controversial award to US President Barack Obama, it seemed increasingly evident that this particular Nobel, anyway, was becoming in the parlance of the mainstream media, "politicized."
Of course, from our point of view, the entire Nobel establishment is "politicized." The power elite that runs it even created a separate "Nobel" for economics and regularly awards various Nobels that are evidently and obviously a kind of propaganda.
What propaganda is the power elite trying to promote? Whatever reinforces the meme of world government. In this case, the EU award for "world peace" is a clear example of the abuse of the awards system.
Many Nobels in some sense reinforce the dominant social theme of global governance. The subdominant theme might be that "you, too" can make a difference by pulling the levers of government. Always, when possible, the idea of substantive change via legislation seems to be stressed.
Government is very important to the power elite, as it rules via mercantilism behind the scenes – exercising the force of government in ways average people have little or no knowledge. Here's some more from the article:
In his acceptance speech, Van Rompuy praised postwar leaders in France and Germany who created the EU by uniting their economic interests: "The EU's secret weapon – an unrivalled way of binding our interests so tightly that war becomes impossible."
The French and German representatives at the ceremony – President Francois Hollande and Chancellor Angela Merkel, respectively – greeted the award with standing ovations.
But critics argued the award was an inappropriate honor. Six EU leaders, including British Prime Minister David Cameron, did not attend the event. The initial news that the European Union won the 2012 Peace Prize sparked heated debate over whether the award was being discredited, a debate that also raged after US President Barack Obama's win in 2009.
The Peace Prize win comes amid Europe's worst financial crisis in decades, as well as numerous accusations of supporting large-scale conflicts abroad.
The 27-member union has been frequently criticized for supporting regime change in foreign countries; several member-states have supported violent crackdowns on anti-government demonstrators.
"I think it devalues the whole concept of the Nobel Peace Prize," Nigel Farage, the leader of the UK Independence Party told RT. "What's really happening is the EU's having its worst year ever and it's got its mates in the international community coming to its aid."
It is noteworthy that certain EU leaders did not attend. The elites that stand behind these promotions are making a lot of missteps in the 21st century, it seems to us. Regularly, themes that are intended to reinforce internationalism are being undermined. Global warming, central banking, even the war on terror are all under increasing attack – and are therefore less effective.
We'd like to think it is because what we call the Internet Reformation is interfering with seamlessness of regular promotions. Facing exposure on all fronts, could it be that the powers-that-be are starting to try too hard? When leaders won't show up, the gaffes are obvious. At one stroke, it would seem, the Nobel establishment has devalued itself and the credibility of the prize.
And because the EU is an increasingly polarizing and authoritarian project, people are noticing. In the 21st century, the assertions of Money Power are no longer sacrosanct. Giving the award to the EU based on its bigness is like giving the award to the former Soviet Union – to which the EU is increasingly compared.
As the EU expands to include the accoutrements of a nation-state, including a flag, an anthem and a nascent military, it looks like nothing so much as an imitation of the US itself – the most warlike and militarily prolific empire in history. And plenty of people both inside the EU "experiment" and outside are increasingly dismayed by its authoritarianism, corruption and imperial ambitions.
Business professor and an independent investment fund manager Max Otte told RT that in his opinion, the EU's policies have brought disorder, not peace … "It has brought unrest," Otte said. "It has nothing to do with peace and maybe it is a way to mislead people about the process."
You see? There begins to be talk of "misleading." And there are protests, too. Oslo residents protested on Sunday night, denouncing "EU arms sales … the lack of aid to refugees and the social turmoil triggered by the eurozone financial crisis."
The EU is no more deserving of the Nobel Peace Prize than any other organization owned and controlled by the same power elite that controls the Nobel awards themselves. One hand is washing the other.
In the 21st century, these ablutions are increasingly evident.