Open Letter to the Nobel Committee
By: Eddie Clements
There is mixed reaction in the United States to your awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to our president, Barack Obama. In your public statements, you indicated the award was as much for intent based on his words and his historic election, which offered the world hope.
Obviously, you are as confused about the meaning of the word â€œhopeâ€, offered up by a deceptive politician, as is our own American electorate.
Inspired by Divine guidance, hope is the thing offered by the very founding of our nation in 1776. For the first time in history, a government was created from the ground up, taking history as lessons in what not to do, and advances in thought from the Enlightenment as guides for what could be accomplished if the individual was free to act. A nation was born, later described by our estimable president Abraham Lincoln as â€œconceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.â€
We had an arduous road to travel before the concept of equality at birth for all people, equal under the law and in application of rights, became a reality and not just words on paper. But we must travel that road ourselves, difficult and imperfect as the journey may be. We will complete that journey, however contrarily dissenters like socialists or those who describe themselves as â€œprogressivesâ€ wish to view our organizing principles.
But the fact is, it must be up to citizens of the United States here in this nation to make those concepts of equality work, and not foreign political agitators with their own selfish agendas. Let there be no mistake about what is being stated here: we are happy to trade business with you, but do not interfere in our politics, our culture, our electoral or legal processes.
If you want to politicize awards created by Alfred Nobel originated with beneficent intent, tainting some of those awards with political corruption, we cannot prevent you from doing so. However, we would thank you to minimize your interference in our affairs.
You do not seem to be aware how our socio-political system differs from yours. What works in your nation will not work in ours. We donâ€™t make value judgments about your system; you owe us the same courtesy. But politeness seems to be on the wane the world over, why should your insignificant nation be any different?
The liberal-progressives/fascists like those in your government, who tell us value judgments are undesirable when applied to them, have no problem making value judgments about what the other guy needs â€“ limiting carbon footprints, raising children, distribution of wealth and property. I notice the Nobel Committee members who appeared on television seem to be well fed and clothed. How about you give all that up and donate all of it to the poorer nations?
I think you will not. From your high perch of supreme arrogance you display all the characteristics typical of the statist â€“ unsolicited advice to others, preening hubris, self-assured condescension.
You see yourselves, your bankrupt collectivist philosophy, as being the solution to all the worldâ€™s ills. If that were so, would not the worldâ€™s populations flock to such a philosophy, given such ample evidence of how well it works wherever tried? Would not the worldâ€™s people demand they be governed under the flag of socialism, if it delivered on its empty promises?
In fact, a socialist system benefits you, so you want to spread it. Therefore, you seek a leader like Barack Obama who shares your perspective. And make no mistake, in Obama you have identified a kindred spirit, even more so than the corrupt Al Gore or embittered Jimmy Carter.
But you, Obama and the other undeserving Peace Prize recipients do not realize that factually and objectively you are part of the problem. It is not democracy and capitalism that has caused the worldâ€™s ills, it is the evil of manâ€™s power over other men, which democracy seeks to limit. That power and its accompanying evil are embodied by the modern construct of statism.
When used wisely, power wielded even by an autocrat can be beneficent. Sadly, that is the exception and not the rule. Even more corrupting than the power of one person over many is the power of a full bureaucratic body of a few, all belonging to one political party, over the many, an effective oligarchy. That is how your country is organized, but your people seem to be contented with their lot enough not to rebel against it. To each his own; if it works, then good for all of your people. But that itself would be an exception of socialism to the rule.
However, statism, collectivism, socialism â€“ whatever you want to call it – will not work here because we are not Norwegians, and the United States is not Norway. What works in a tiny, ice-bound nation with a homogeneous population, few achievements and no responsibilities will not work in a large, ethnically diverse, heterogeneous population with significant achievements and attendant responsibilities like America. Do you have the awareness to extend the meaning of the above to the other nations of the world? Even France and Germany want to move toward capitalism and away from socialism.
Is everything in your nation shared equally? Even though unfairness and unequal distribution of goods and resources is a fact of life for now, it does not have to remain so. Viewing a population as producing units all lumped together, as statism/collectivism must view them, exacerbates that problem by putting decision-making in the hands of a few party hacks, disconnected from discrete situations. But the solution is not giving a few elitists, like socialists/progressive-fascists, loyal only to one political party, the power to make decisions for the many.
The solution is to allow freedom for as many individuals as possible to make their own choices, within a system of objectively and consistently applied laws and rights made by representatives freely elected – in two words, democracy and capitalism. The solution lies in limiting the power of government over the body politic so all people as individuals, according to their gifts, have the power to rise to their full potential. Statism/socialism artificially assigns limits based on nothing more than whim and caprice, the socialist philosophy Obama believes in. We must assume you agree.
And no, Obama was not freely elected, if by â€œelectedâ€ you mean chosen by an informed electorate. Our widely available press is composed of people of the same political persuasion as Obama, who actively suppressed adverse information about the candidate. They became advocates, abandoning journalism. Information was skewed favorably toward the candidate preferred by members of the press. We are fixing that. Obama deceived the electorate by presenting himself as a democrat. In reality he is a collectivist/statist.
Most of the 190-odd nations of the world are despotic, like yours. However, you view yourselves as enlightened, and therefore may object to the description â€œdespoticâ€. But that is the view of all despots, that they and only they know what is best for everyone else because of their unique talents and insight.
That would be incorrect.
Americans by and large reject socialism, because in part we reject both elitism and artificially imposed limits on individual achievement. The Communist Party conducted an experiment for seventy years on the worldâ€™s largest nation in area and one of the worldâ€™s richest nations in resources, Russia. Communism expanded poisonously. The old Soviet Union ended in disaster, after murderously depleting its people and creating economic chaos by misdirecting its resources. Individuals were crushed under the weight of statism, innovation lost, achievement all but ignored. Their greatest advancements were made by stealing secrets from the United States â€“ where true innovation flourished.
Speaking of which, what invention or innovation has Norway bestowed upon the world lately? The US and capitalism invented, or made work, things like mass automobile production, mass home building, distribution of electric power, the airplane, the computer, the internet, television, radio, light bulbs, refrigeration, frozen foods, and more. What were the noble Communist nations contributing in all that time?
When disasters happen anywhere in the world, who responds â€œfirst-est with the most-estâ€, to paraphrase one of our great men? What country helped rid Norway of the NAZIâ€™s, a democracy or a dictatorship? When Muslims were being slaughtered in the middle of Europe, who responded to end that slaughter, socialist, collectivist Europeans or democratic, free-enterprise Americans?
Next time you need help, and you will, take care of it yourself, instead of asking American taxpayers to bail you out. Mind this, that if Obama succeeds the way you want him to, the US will not be able to help you out in the future because we will no longer be wealthy enough to do so. Ask China or Russia, or your beloved Hugo Chavez in Venezuela.
Meantime, most Americans have reacted to this award the only way possible, roars of laughter. You have demeaned your nation and the award itself by conferring the previously-thought-of honor first on the murderous terrorist Yassir Arafat, and now someone who did nothing to earn it. I do not personally begrudge the American president the award, but it is a joke.
How dare you criticize us! A pox on you and your house. You wanted to give us a â€œkick in the legâ€ by honoring Jimmy Carter, so here is a return kick: stick to the things you know, and stay away from things you donâ€™t â€“ freedom, God-fearing Americans, and free enterprise.
May God bless and keep America, the last best REAL hope of humankind on Earth.