As an Ethiopian man, I view this new Nobel Peace Prize with profound skepticism, a feeling rooted entirely in the disastrous outcome of Abiy Ahmed's utterly undeserved award. The premature praise he received for peace-making quickly evaporated, leading instead to a catastrophic war and the fragmentation of our nation. His prize has been followed by widespread conflict, massive displacement, and an alarming return to authoritarian rule. For us, the entire Nobel Peace Prize now feels meaningless, a hollow symbol given its failure to prevent—or perhaps its role in emboldening—such terrible suffering in Ethiopia
She’s been in hiding since the last elections that Maduro blatantly stole. I lost hope myself about Venezuela but I wish the regime ends soon for those still there enduring it.
Is the Nobel Peace Prize given to people who accomplished a lot as individuals (like Maria Corina Machado) or people who accomplished a lot at scale without doing much beyond a few phone calls and document-signings, like Trump?
Because a few phone calls and document-signings can bring about many orders of magnitude more "peace units" in the world, if backed by the world's largest economy and the world's most effective military at projecting power.
Don't get me wrong. She has firmly opposed maduro and is a beacon of hope for many in Venezuela but she hasn't accomplished anything meaningful yet? She is just a career politician that just happens to be in the opposition of the venezuelan goverment when Maduro (a dictator) is in power. But she hasn't done anything extraordinary to merit the award.
There has been some speculation that if Trump didn't win this one, he'll lose all motivation in making peace, at least in the near future. Like for example Gaza.
The man has the shortest attention span in history, and needs constant dopamine hits to continue on something.
But as I said in another thread, María Corina Machado is more than worthy - and well deserved. It is just such a shame that Trump will likely throw the biggest tantrum, and destroy stuff, for no other reason that he didn't get the big shiny thing he wanted.
Notice what they said: This year's peace prize is being given to someone for transitioning a country from dictatorship to democracy. They sure as hell aren't going to give it to someone doing the opposite!
lol!! Most people from rest of the world, minus west, knows what Nobel prize is all about. It is just a political tool for usa and west. Clearly, it about Venezuela oil and gold. Pathetic to see their hypocrisy and double standards.
Why do people have this weird idea that humans reliably pick the correct answer, even given infinite information?
Humans are incapable of being rational, it's not how our brains function. We can, with great effort, emulate what we think rational thought would be like.
Human brains regularly lie to themselves because it is cheaper or easier than actually processing input.
You know that fun retort: "Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?", and how it's always trotted out as this supposed retort to someone suggesting you ignore obvious info, but our eyes are lying to us constantly. There are tons of ways your eyes cheat, or lie, or outright ignore reality in favor of some internal model. This isn't even limited to optical illusions!
And the same is true of all sensory input we have. There are auditory illusions and ways your ears lie to you. There are things like phantom limbs that demonstrate your brain will ignore explicit and clear reality for no reason.
Humans are emotional creatures, like all biological creatures. Humans make choices emotionally
Do you think the most emotionally charged information will always be truthful?
The outcome we are experiencing was obvious, but people ignored it because that sort of implies that information needs to be filtered or curated and that makes people nervous.
> Reading the opinions in this thread just shatters any hope for humanity.
the fact that you are able to read opinions that don't match yours is for me a positive. better to have it imho than to only see what one agrees with at all times.
now whether the discourse is healthy or not is up to the rest.
Would have preferred it going to aid workers in Gaza or something like that but an NED-funded dissident politician will do as long as it's not Donald Trump.
Things in the US seem to keep sliding toward further power centralization. Regardless of politics, that is bad policy of the highest order (bit).
Great opportunity for someone to create some effective opposition.
There is a medal in it!
Ironically, someone who badly wants a medal is actually in the perfect position to turn around the brain/competency drain, “bring back science”, boost US competition with China’s green tech wave, help Ukraine win (instead of the endless: “not lose for now”), fire the all the senate confirmed bozos…
If he did, a Nobel prize would be unconventional under the circumstances. But well worth it nevertheless.
No Rushmore. There isn’t enough room left on that mountain for that size of an ego. But maybe a genuine gold working toilet installation for Rushmore tourists.
———
Humor, despair and any bias of mine aside. I am quite seriously unaware of anyone with a good opposition plan, to reverse the power centralization, at this point.
Perhaps a constitutional amendment, reaffirming key points of the existing constitution with a highlighter for supreme justices with poor eyesight, might be one promising approach.
> “No person shall” [something, something] “hold any office” [something, something], “who, having” [something, something] “engaged in insurrection”, [something, something] “or given aid” [or incited, or encouraged insurrection, or threatened a vice president for not implementing an insurrection, or delayed relief for law enforcement engaged in stopping an insurrection] “or comfort” [or praise or approval or promises of pardons] “to the enemies thereof.”
> […All the powers of the purse given to the representative branch, with no provision for presidential “creative” reinterpretation…]
> [Etc., etc.]
If anyone wants to give a shout out to anyone building effective resistance to the avalanche of presidential power, essentially being voluntarily abdicated by the other two branches, I would be interested to hear of them.
(Traditionally that has been a very high consensus bipartisan issue. Not everyone, but most everyone.)
90 comments
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 75.1 ms ] threadhttps://x.com/polymarket/status/1976434242386317640
Someone without any history whatsoever put 70k on her 5 hours before the announcement
https://x.com/polywhalewatch/status/1976499384373121488
Trump was never above 5-10% and out of nowhere she was the winner (see the 1 day market view) https://polymarket.com/event/nobel-peace-prize-winner-2025?t...
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/oct/10/trump-nobel-...
Because a few phone calls and document-signings can bring about many orders of magnitude more "peace units" in the world, if backed by the world's largest economy and the world's most effective military at projecting power.
The man has the shortest attention span in history, and needs constant dopamine hits to continue on something.
But as I said in another thread, María Corina Machado is more than worthy - and well deserved. It is just such a shame that Trump will likely throw the biggest tantrum, and destroy stuff, for no other reason that he didn't get the big shiny thing he wanted.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/oct/09/norway-braces-...
Humans are incapable of being rational, it's not how our brains function. We can, with great effort, emulate what we think rational thought would be like.
Human brains regularly lie to themselves because it is cheaper or easier than actually processing input.
You know that fun retort: "Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?", and how it's always trotted out as this supposed retort to someone suggesting you ignore obvious info, but our eyes are lying to us constantly. There are tons of ways your eyes cheat, or lie, or outright ignore reality in favor of some internal model. This isn't even limited to optical illusions!
And the same is true of all sensory input we have. There are auditory illusions and ways your ears lie to you. There are things like phantom limbs that demonstrate your brain will ignore explicit and clear reality for no reason.
Humans are emotional creatures, like all biological creatures. Humans make choices emotionally
Do you think the most emotionally charged information will always be truthful?
The outcome we are experiencing was obvious, but people ignored it because that sort of implies that information needs to be filtered or curated and that makes people nervous.
the fact that you are able to read opinions that don't match yours is for me a positive. better to have it imho than to only see what one agrees with at all times.
now whether the discourse is healthy or not is up to the rest.
Just to see what happens.
Great opportunity for someone to create some effective opposition.
There is a medal in it!
Ironically, someone who badly wants a medal is actually in the perfect position to turn around the brain/competency drain, “bring back science”, boost US competition with China’s green tech wave, help Ukraine win (instead of the endless: “not lose for now”), fire the all the senate confirmed bozos…
If he did, a Nobel prize would be unconventional under the circumstances. But well worth it nevertheless.
No Rushmore. There isn’t enough room left on that mountain for that size of an ego. But maybe a genuine gold working toilet installation for Rushmore tourists.
———
Humor, despair and any bias of mine aside. I am quite seriously unaware of anyone with a good opposition plan, to reverse the power centralization, at this point.
Perhaps a constitutional amendment, reaffirming key points of the existing constitution with a highlighter for supreme justices with poor eyesight, might be one promising approach.
> “No person shall” [something, something] “hold any office” [something, something], “who, having” [something, something] “engaged in insurrection”, [something, something] “or given aid” [or incited, or encouraged insurrection, or threatened a vice president for not implementing an insurrection, or delayed relief for law enforcement engaged in stopping an insurrection] “or comfort” [or praise or approval or promises of pardons] “to the enemies thereof.”
> […All the powers of the purse given to the representative branch, with no provision for presidential “creative” reinterpretation…]
> [Etc., etc.]
If anyone wants to give a shout out to anyone building effective resistance to the avalanche of presidential power, essentially being voluntarily abdicated by the other two branches, I would be interested to hear of them.
(Traditionally that has been a very high consensus bipartisan issue. Not everyone, but most everyone.)