Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Nobel Committee Admits Getting Into Derivatives Trading in Giving Peace Prize to Obama

By Drew Westen, AlterNet. Posted October 12, 2009.


What led to the unusual decision to bet on futures rather than follow the century-old precedent of selecting someone who has actually accomplished something?
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

A spokesman from the Nobel committee yesterday spoke on condition of anonymity about the controversial decision to award the Nobel Peace Prize to President Barack Obama, who as yet has solved no international crisis or created peaceful resolution to any conflict but has delivered some awesome speeches that have breathed new life into the Norwegian stock exchange, the Red Herring 500, according to the committee member.

"There's derivatives trading now in virtually every commodity known to humankind," noted the source. "So why not peace?"

He added that rare commodities with unpredictable futures are particularly attractive to derivatives traders and that peace certainly falls into that category. With many on the right objecting that Obama hasn't done anything to earn the prize and many on the left complaining that his record domestically has been to deliver magnificent speeches without following up with any decisive actions and to paper over conflicts with inspiring words and half-measures, the Nobel committee member admitted on background that he wasn't sure whether the action of the committee technically could be considered hedging or derivatives trading, but he was counting on it to create a competitive market for both peace and Obama memorabilia.

According to inside sources, the decision to award Obama the peace prize represented an unprecedented joint decision of the committees charged with selecting winners in economics and peace.

Derivatives are complex financial products that no one on the peace committee understood. However, it had help from the committee on economics, which has been considering co-awarding its Nobel this year to Timothy Geithner and Larry Summers for their collaboration in creating and then halting the economic crisis that began with the collapse of Lehman Bros. in September 2008.

One member of the economics committee pointed out the extraordinary nature of their achievement: "Before Geithner and Summers, we could only perform econometric computer simulations. They were the first to demonstrate experimentally, in real time, that you can collapse the world economy with neoclassical economic theories and then revive it with Keynesian principles. We've been waiting for someone to test Keynesian principles definitively in the real world for over 60 years. This is a truly stunning achievement."

Members of the peace committee were moved by the arguments of their colleagues in economics.

"The possibilities of trading in secondary peace products are extremely exciting," noted the anonymous source. "Imagine if we could have used the peace prize to leverage Mussolini into not exercising his option to buy fascism from Hitler in the early to mid-1930s."

Unfortunately, the Great Depression made any attempt at deregulation of peace commodities at that time untenable.

Upon hearing about the committee's decision to introduce speculation into the peace market, a number of experts expressed serious concerns.

"Now is not the time to introduce subprime honorees into the Nobel portfolio," argued one experienced diplomat, who worried that the committee might next award the prize to Libyan not-so-strong-man-anymore Moammar Gadhafi. Doing so, he argued, could lead to an inflated peace market that could produce the equivalent of a housing bubble, or at least an inflated tent.

The committee had apparently strongly considered Gadhafi as an alternative to Obama, noting that his decision not to blow up any planes in over 20 years constituted a Nobel-caliber contribution to world peace, and that, like Obama, he had done something by doing nothing. However, his chances were dramatically reduced when the Libyan government gave a hero's welcome to the returning Lockerbee bomber who had been released on humanitarian grounds because he has three months left to live, after doctors in Scotland determined him either to be, or to have, a "malignant asshole."

Insiders have acknowledged that this was a weak year for candidates for the peace prize, leading to the unusual decision to bet on futures rather than follow the century-old precedent of selecting someone who has actually accomplished something, like Yassir Arafat, who once shaved for an episode of "Terrorists Gone Wild."

Given its interest in borrowing methods from the financial industry, however, the committee did consider short-selling the prize to former Vice President Dick Cheney. However, it ultimately decided that Cheney had already been awarded the title of "Dick," and that they couldn't really top that.

The committee's decision ultimately came down to the choice between either Obama for not being George Bush or Bush for not being president.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: obama, peace prize, nobel

Drew Westen, Ph.D., is professor of psychology and psychiatry at Emory University, founder of Westen Strategies, and author of The Political Brain: The Role of Emotion in Deciding the Fate of the Nation.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from World! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
a truly stunning admission!!
Posted by: brianct on Oct 12, 2009 12:36 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
'r. One member of the economics committee pointed out the extraordinary nature of their achievement: "Before Geithner and Summers we could only perform econometric computer simulations. They were the first to demonstrate experimentally, in real time, that you can collapse the world economy with neoclassical economic theories and then revive it with Keynesian principles. We've been waiting for someone to test Keynesian principles definitively in the real world for over 60 years. This is a truly stunning achievement."'
======================


So we are lab rats, to be tested upon by 'men' like Summers, collapsing our economy...and this deserves an award? SHAME

Once again thr Nobel committees show they are as sociopathic as any scientist, which is why the ALTERNATIVE NOBEL PRIZE is a far worthier award

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: a truly stunning admission!! Posted by: tony_opmoc
» RE: a truly stunning admission!! Posted by: Ian MacLeod
Using crooked financial concepts to give a "peace" prize?
Posted by: JenniferBedingfield on Oct 12, 2009 12:42 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
At this point, the damage is done. It is just getting more obvious that it is all about fudging the standards for their ruling class. The reality is that there is not a dime's worth of difference between Dubya and Obama. It's just possible that Obama has some sort of a deal to cut with Europe that Dubya would never do. I wouldn't mind the deal but I still suspect that it is all about rewarding the ruling class cronies in Europe. I am sure that they could find some way to twist any financial concept to make it appear that they were not biased in their picking. No wonder sweethearts like Mahatma Gandhi, Ralph Nader, Cynthia Mckinney, Cindy Sheehan, Rachel Corrie, and the rest of the non-monied people who fought their hearts and souls for peace on Earth despite the tormenting and persecution were never even considered. Heck, by the Nobel Committee's derivative trading crooked thinking, they could easily give it to Osama bin Laden and the conservatives would have a field day at this !

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I think you've been reading
Posted by: intrigued on Oct 12, 2009 1:35 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
SATIRE

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» ditto Posted by: dogeatdog
» RE: Yes... Posted by: oregoncharles
Slight mistake
Posted by: Swatopluk on Oct 12, 2009 1:51 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It was Mussolini who sold, not bought, fascism to his Northern neighbour. The problem was that neither sold it fast enough when the prices topped, then toppled.
Btw, Mr. Q from Libya is usually nominated for the Literature Nobel (that is not a joke!).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

BA
Posted by: mnstra on Oct 12, 2009 2:41 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Look at Noam Chompsky and the manufacture of consent. The Nobel group rubber stamped the war policies as one writer described.So with this award, anything is [possible and the rest of the fools who work for a living will go along. Obama presides over two wars. If he had ended them , he would deserve the prize/But the Nobel committee loves what he is doing. They want that oil. plan and simple.They just change the language and get the news media to sell it to fools who dont know better.The problem is , just being smart in the country is a handicap.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: BA Posted by: tony_opmoc
» RE: BA Posted by: Basenjis
DrBob
Posted by: ProfBob on Oct 12, 2009 4:02 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Living in Norway and being on speaking terms with some insiders, I've never heard anything like this.
I can't believe that the Swedes on the economic committee even talked to the Norwegians on the Oeasce Prize committee.
One former Norwegian prime minister is head of the Peace Prize Committee. Another commented on the award to Obama at a reception at the South African Embassy the night of the award. He said that Obama has brought the U.S. back into the family of nation. That, of course is a major accomplishment in just eight months.
Words must come before action--they guide the action. Obama has, through his words, relaxed world tensions, and given hope to the world. Through his actions he has rejoined the UN by paying the dues. Heck, in Jesus's 3 years he just talked--except when he threw the Pharisees out of the temple. So obviously the hard Republican right wouldn't back their Christ for the prize! Words are obviously not enough! And what, other than words and hope, has the Dalai Lama done. Some Nobel Peace laureates have done amazing things, others have pointed the way.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» ...and OBAMA POINTS THE WAY... Posted by: americansheep
» RE: DrBob Posted by: Basenjis
ProfBob
Posted by: ProfBob on Oct 12, 2009 4:04 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Living in Norway and being on speaking terms with some insiders, I've never heard anything like this.
I can't believe that the Swedes on the economic committee even talked to the Norwegians on the Peace Prize committee.
One former Norwegian prime minister is head of the Peace Prize Committee. Another commented on the award to Obama at a reception at the South African Embassy the night of the award. He said that Obama has brought the U.S. back into the family of nation. That, of course is a major accomplishment in just eight months.
Words must come before action--they guide the action. Obama has, through his words, relaxed world tensions, and given hope to the world. Through his actions he has rejoined the UN by paying the dues. Heck, in Jesus's 3 years he just talked--except when he threw the Pharisees out of the temple. So obviously the hard Republican right wouldn't back their Christ for the prize! Words are obviously not enough! And what, other than words and hope, has the Dalai Lama done. Some Nobel Peace laureates have done amazing things, others have pointed the way.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I think a satire alert is needed.
Posted by: Beck on Oct 12, 2009 4:55 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Right? If these are real quotes, alternet certainly got the inside scoop. There is nothing on google about this, except for hits leading to alternet.

I bet it's quoted as if true, though.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

you need to label this as satire
Posted by: gemelabuena on Oct 12, 2009 5:34 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
i know it seems really obvious to the writer and editors, but you can see from some of the comments here that some readers believe it to be true. given the real facts about the derivative trading industry, i don't think this comes off as being as far-fetched as it's intended. we are drowning in misinformation in this country... please don't fuel the fire.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» NO SATIRE LABEL NEEDED Posted by: americansheep
» RE: NO SATIRE LABEL NEEDED Posted by: Ian MacLeod
Funny
Posted by: leafsong1 on Oct 12, 2009 5:34 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Funny
Posted by: leafsong1 on Oct 12, 2009 5:34 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

My view is very different
Posted by: Bob Horn on Oct 12, 2009 6:03 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Saving the world from another 4 years of right wing idiot rule is a good enough reason to get the Nobel Prize. In addition to that one of about a thousand other reasons he deserves it is the work he did with Richard Lugar to stop the spread of loose nukes. If Richard Lugar got the award instead all the people angry that Obama got it would be noticing Lugar's party affiliation (Republican) and his skin color (white) and be talking about how much he deserved it. I think the media as a whole is repeating right wing talking points about this event (the awarding of the prize.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: My view is very different Posted by: Basenjis
Humor is relative
Posted by: bonapartist on Oct 12, 2009 7:51 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I personally don't find the article to be very funny but I do find it quite disturbing.

To put it simply, Obama's Nobel Peace Prize really is as absurd as the possibility of Geitner receiving a Nobel Prize in Economics. The sad fact is that the former is a reality and the later is absurd fiction.

In essence Obama, warlord carrying on two wars received Nobel Peace Prize for:

a) Not being George W. Bush
b) Making a few pretty speeches
c) Having good PR
d) Switching to diplomacy when big club policy failed and the coffers are empty

The other nominees, who arguably did more and could use the Prize better, included:

Piedad Cordoba, the Colombian senator, has successfully mediated between the Government of Colombia and the FARC guerrilla group.

Dr. Sima Samar is heading a movement on behalf of the down-trodden women of Afghanistan.

The Chinese activist Hu Jia is engaged in a peaceful struggle for human rights and free expression in China.

Morgan Tsvangirai, the Prime Minister of Zimbabwe, is admired for challenging the dictatorship of the notorious Robert Mugabe.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Yes, really funny Posted by: bonapartist
don't worry, it's just gallows humor
Posted by: ThePoliticalBrain on Oct 12, 2009 8:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Don't worry, it's satire--the Norwegians don't have a stock exchange called the Red Herring 500. But it is in fact making a couple serious points.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Gentle Persuasion
Posted by: willymack on Oct 12, 2009 10:15 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think that beyond the Onionesque article there is a grain of truth and an insight into the motivations of the prize committee.
This IS the Peace Prize, after all.
After the bellicose posturing of the bush crime family, which scared the daylights out of nearly everyone, comes a polished, urbane, and dignified man, worthy of the title Head of State, reaching out with the olive branch of diplomacy and reconciliation towards nations such as Iran and North Korea.
This is the prize committee's way of saying "OK, you've got your recognition; now follow through and create PEACE for a change", in my opinion.
Gentle persuasion, if you will.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Gentle Persuasion Posted by: Bob Horn
» RE: Gentle Persuasion Posted by: Bob Horn
Caution: Unlabeled Satire Warning!
Posted by: LightningJoe on Oct 12, 2009 6:00 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have a real problem with this, and I think I'm one of the many, here.

I've complained to HuffPost before, about unlabeled comedy and satire content that finds its way into the ranks of the news pages and links, where it masquerades as a news story, leaving it up to the reader to do the fact-checking. It seems you guys do it the same way.

Granted, this dynamic works as intended in many respects, for the point of satire is partially obverted by labeling it as such. The reader is supposed to be wondering if such things may or may not be true, until he or she finds the "golden clue" -- such as the mention of a show or movie called "Terrorists Gone Wild," (that we assume and hope has never been made).

Also, the reader who "gets" the joke feels smarter and better than the poor schmoes who complain, thinking that they are reading facts -- a valid reason, in some quarters, for continuing the practice.

But that said, there are cogent reasons to be more careful these days in drawing the distinction between facts and satire. For one, the base of reference information available to a given reader these days is of such a variety, in both quantity and quality, that a diminishing number of readers are equipped ahead of time with the background facts to be able to tell truth from satire reliably. Sad, but quite true. FAUX watchers already think of our President is a walking satire, based on the partial information they receive, and demonstrably would believe virtually any untrue thing they hear about him. Adding REAL nonsense to that mix puts them and us at risk of open flames exploding a volatile mixture of fact and lies.

Second, the world these days is changing so fast -- including in how we handle true and false information -- that there is little information that would reliably inform us that something we hear or see in print simply can't be so. To assume that a random person will spot the buried clue that says this is satire -- and that they will then be confident in their perception -- is becoming a more and more risky assumption every day. Many readers will never read the whole piece through, and you shouldn't assume a common level of background information in your readership; especially when so many Americans can barely read!

And last but not least, some of us don't watch TV anymore, and therefore will not get some of your (doubtless quite clever) references. When all of the satire detection relies on TV-spread clues to get it, those of us who are TV-Free will be left behind until the cycle slowly turns TV into print on the internet. And I'm NOT going to start watching the idiot box, just so I can get the references in your satires. It's simply not worth spending my precious brain's life, putting garbage into it.

Adapt or die; it's your choice. Label it somehow, as the Onion does, or risk adding to the morass of misinformation in the bottoms of our cages.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Oh For Pete's Sake
Posted by: desidid on Oct 12, 2009 7:11 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have gripes with the president just like anybody else but you people have taken this to a whole new level. Gays want DADT ended today not tomorrow, he doesn't deserve the Nobel, he hasn't ended the wars, he expanded the Patriot Act, he wasn't born here, his left nut hangs lower than his right nut, I mean really when does it end? Because I'm just getting sick of the incessant noise about issues he is clearly working on but can't get done alone. Why didn't I hear all this bullshit during the 12 years when this was beginning?

Why wasn't there a daily chorus of complaints and protest against the war, but now people can get up off their fat asses to protest at elementary schools because of songs or the president's speech on staying in school and doing well? Why are the Democrats so ineffectual just read the blogs and you will see the coalition that brought them together was as cohesive as wet toilet paper.

Basically progressives seem to have wanted to say they voted for a black man, more than they supported a president. Why did he win the Nobel prize I don't care and like all of you I really don't know. I can only hope he will live up to the prize. And unlike the last president this one has taken months to try to figure out how to deal with a mess that required much less thought to create.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Yes, yes, yes, he needs more time Posted by: bonapartist
So it was a PR stunt, cynical political ploy? Norway wants oil? "OIL RICH NORWAY GUARDS WEALTH" .
Posted by: Beck on Oct 13, 2009 5:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Some of you might find this interesting. Here's the beginning:


http://seattletimes.nwsource.com /html/nationworld/2004024446_norway20.html

(Remove space after "com")

OIL-RICH NORWAY GUARDS ITS WEALTH
Seattle Times


"If you wanted to design a small, 21st-century nation from scratch, combining outrageous good fortune with virtue, you'd probably come up with something like Norway.

"With a per-capita income of $65,509, Norway ranks second only to superrich Luxembourg. Much of the wealth derives from North Sea oil, but Norwegians have barely touched a penny of it, instead putting more than $350 billion into an investment fund for future generations.

"Health-care services are considered among the best in the world and are available to everyone, with the cap on out-of-pocket expenses at $200 a year. Working women on maternity leave get a year off at 80 percent pay. Elderly Norwegians seeking to escape the harsh northern winters can retire to government-run geriatric communities in sunny Spain.

"Norway, home of the Nobel Peace Prize, has no enemies, but it does have a well-trained army that is always on the front lines of international peacekeeping missions. It also gives generously to less fortunate nations, donating more per capita than any other country.

"And the government recently unveiled plans to cut its greenhouse-gas emissions to zero and thus become the world's first "carbon-neutral" country by 2050.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Oh shill, you forgot to mention Posted by: bonapartist
» For the oil? Posted by: bonapartist
As Funny As This Article Is...
Posted by: MyLeftFoot on Oct 13, 2009 10:18 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've always thought that if there was a way to make absurd profits from peace we would have a lot more of it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement