Why should these people get any kind of honour just for doing their jobs?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-27813303
And don't even get me started on the jobs for the boys peerages for politicians.
Printable View
Why should these people get any kind of honour just for doing their jobs?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-27813303
And don't even get me started on the jobs for the boys peerages for politicians.
Jolie has done much more than just her jop and the peasants need someone to look up to anyway.
In a time where most peasants fail even at doing their job properly, a man who does already serves as a positive example.
At least Jolie has got something other than "Done their bloody job and got well paid for it" in the reason for the honour
That was (part of) my point. Didn't like her at first but by now I think she is quite a nice lady who actually cares. :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ja'chyra
If there were any politicians who actually did thier goddamn jobs I'd give them an honour.Quote:
Why should these people get any kind of honour just for doing their jobs?
Well the reasoning is that they excelled in their jobs in such a way as to benefit the nation - all sorts of 'commoners' get awards for this reason as well, teachers and the like.
So how many knighthoods have been given to normal, everyday people who are not well paid movie stars/CEO's/politicians or politicians bum chums?
Presumably proportional to the amount of american citizen medals.
Is that a zero?
I dont know, you tell me how many people have recieved the Presidential Medal of Freedom and didnt deserve it. Considering thier ranks include Regan, Thatcher and Blair I would guess a couple. It's an award given by humans, every now and then they're given to the undeserving.
if you skip past the celebrities and politicians/political sponsors who get all the "higher" honours the vast majority of the honours go to ordinary people - if you download the entire list it is 119 pages long... the media just don't bother reporting past the first few pages...
My point exactlyQuote:
Originally Posted by Sir Moody
Never trust people wearing blood capsules as necklaces.Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
You're all acting like this isn't n irrelevant relic of a distant age we do not want to return to.
Dictators like their medals.
Noble prizes are pretty good. They all go to the common man who has contributed to society.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
Except for the one that awards millions to terrorists and politicians on promises. Which nation awards that one again?
That would be the TRUE custodians of Nobel's legacy, the Norwegians. All-in-all, they award the Peace Prize (which he favored above the others) more or less exactly as Nobel envisaged it being awarded -- and good intentions were as or more important to the award criteria than practicable results.Quote:
Originally Posted by Papewaio
The rest of the awards generally provide middle-aged academics with a pat on the back for good work done when they were young, arrogant, and single.
I applaud your excellent understanding of Nobels intentions! A rare trait these days.Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh
You schooled me on it years ago and subsequent readings about Nobel make it clear that your interpretation of things was spot on target.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
I think Nobel was a good bit hypocritical given his personal success story (though perhaps remorseful might be equally true) and that his peace prize is far too much of a "Let's all sing Kumbaya" process to actually have any value, but I do acknowledge it's stated purpose and parameters. It's not like they hide anything.
The norwegian Nobel peace prize is a international joke...
Kissinger?
Arafat?
Obama?
Gore?
Of COURSE it is a joke. Precisely BECAUSE it adheres to and reflect the guidelines Nobel laid out for it. As a political thinker, he was a great chemist.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV
Reasonable and accurate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh
But you still spoilt my trolling! :)
Hypocritical isn't a word fitting Nobel. Remorseful definitely is. He had a change of mind in his later years, similar to a 60-year old born again christian. The anti-war movement was surprisingly radical in the late 19th century, and he was convinced of their arguments. "Unilateral disarmament" was his ideal for peace, and it is this the peace prize was set up to create(not just reward). In the last decades, there have been some weird prizes, and the peace prize has branched out a little from that ideal. However, the weird prizes, in regards to Nobel, are not the usualy suspects. The EU, Kissinger, Arafat/Perez and such definitely deserved the prize. Ebadi and Karman? Probably not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh