Solving the Peace Prize Al-Gorythm
Did Al Gore deserve to win the Nobel Peace Prize?
Jacques Marcoux, Volunteer Staff
Al Gore, former vice-president of the United States, is this year’s Nobel Peace Prize laureate. Given Gore’s recent winning-streak of awards, including an Emmy and an Oscar, it came as no surprise that the impending Peace Prize would be awarded to him as well. However, as important of a topic global warming is, I feel that the Peace Prize was not awarded within the same philosophical realm as it was to prior winners. In short, handing Gore the award dilutes and disparages the significance of the Nobel Peace Prize as we have come to know it.
Let us consider some of the previous Peace Prize laureates. In 1993, Nelson Mandela won for spearheading the struggle against apartheid in South Africa. In 1989, the 14th Dalai Lama won the prize for promulgating concepts of universal responsibility and peace. In 1984, Desmond Tutu won for his relentless effort against apartheid. And last, but not least, the always-modest Mother Teresa won for her well-documented humanitarian efforts.
Given the list of some of the past Peace Prize winners, Al Gore seems to stick out like a sore thumb. If this were a segment of Sesame Street’s “One of these things is not like the other,” Al Gore would be the odd banana among the apples.
One of the chief criticisms of the Nobel Peace Prize is that contrary to both the scientific and literary Nobel Prizes, which are generally issued in retrospect once the achievement has stood the test of time, the Peace Prize is often given to individuals who are simply seen by contemporary opinion in a positive light, often in the spur of the moment. In the case of this year’s award, environmentalism is at a political peak and is at the forefront of discussion, which bodes well for Gore. However, this potentially overshadows other accomplishments and issues of equal or greater urgency.
Al Gore was not a pioneer in global warming activism, despite his involvement in the development of Kyoto Accord. One could argue strongly that David Suzuki, a pioneer in environmental activism who warned the world about this looming crisis decades ago, is of true Nobel Prize fibre. Instead, Al Gore’s sudden rise to fame is the result of him rebranding and mainstreaming global warming. Gore has essentially condensed pre-existing information in such a way that even the lowest denominator could not only learn but pay attention for long enough, enabling the facts to sink in. In brief, Al Gore brought the sexy back in global warming — but this should not warrant a place among the Nobel Prize elite.
The critical factor setting apart the
Al Gore brought the sexy back in global warming — but this should not warrant a place among the Nobel Prize elite.
“Mother Teresas” and the “Desmond Tutus” of the world from Al Gore is that the former winners lived their lives daily in the spirit of the Peace Prize, and their contributions have transcended generations and will continue to do so. It is quite possible that I am prematurely dismissing Al Gore’s achievements, but one would be hard-pressed to believe that his impact will be recognizable 10 years into the future as a true catalyst of change. Someone such as David Suzuki, for instance, will forever be quoted and associated with issues surrounding the livelihood of the Earth.
The Nobel Peace Prize selection committee, appointed by the Norwegian Parliament, clearly made a decision based on popularity of the nominee and the prominence of the underlying issue rather than on more objective and impartial criteria. Would an environmental activist have ever been selected as the laureate in the early ’90s when global warming issues were nowhere to be seen on the political radar?
According to the Nobel Foundation, the award was granted to Al Gore (and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) for his “efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about human-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change.” Back in 2006, Warren Buffet, the third-richest man in the world, donated $31 billion to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which will be directed towards research on HIV and AIDS worldwide. If an extraordinarily unprecedented monetary donation did not win a Nobel Peace Prize for Bill Gates or Warren Buffet, why then did political clout lead to an award in the case of Gore?
The criticism towards awarding Al Gore the Nobel Peace Prize should not be regarded as a pot shot at environmental issues; rather, it is an effort to uphold and protect the significance such an honour. Indisputably, Al Gore has helped bring the topic of global warming to the forefront of discussion and should be recognized, but he is merely a cog in the wheel in terms of the greater movement. He is not leading the masses towards the social paradigm shift that is necessary to counteract the damage that’s been done and, therefore, should not be rubbing shoulders with the likes of Nelson Mandela and the Dalai Lama as a result of his Nobel Peace Prize.
Jacques Marcoux is a fourth-year student of commerce.
