David Lange receives 'alternative Nobel' - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties from Japan to Turkmenistan to New Zealand.

Moderator: PoFo Asia & Australasia Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please. This is an international political discussion forum moderated in English, so please post in English only. Thank you.
#30053
For those of you who don't know who David Lange is, he is a former Labour Prime Minister of New Zealand. About the best debator I've ever seen, quick wit and very funny.

David Lange:

Image

Lange receives 'alternative Nobel'

http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,267 ... 60,00.html

Former Prime Minister David Lange was having a relaxing day and had not planned any festivities to celebrate winning a prestigious award last night, he said today.


Mr Lange was one of the winners of the Right Livelihood Awards, known as the "alternative Nobels" which he will accept at a ceremony at the Swedish parliament on December 8.

The award was founded in 1980 by Jakob von Uexkull, a stamp dealer who sold his collection to fund a programme to recognise work that he believed was ignored by the prestigious Nobel prizes. The Nobel prize for literature was also announced last night but New Zealand author Janet Frame, who had been mentioned as a favourite, did not win.

Mr Lange was given the honorary prize "for his steadfast work over many years for a world free of nuclear weapons".

At a news conference Mr von Uexkull noted Mr Lange's opposition to nuclear weapons and said he was a "pioneer in the fight against weapons of mass destruction".

Today Mr Lange told NewstalkZB he was going to have a quiet day.

"I am going to take my daughter and her friend out and we are going to go eventually to an Asian food court and that is the sort of day I will have."

He said there was an "enormous amount of retrospectivity" with his award.

"It is structured so you reflect past rather than the future.

"I would not have got this at all had it not been for a long tradition of people in New Zealand being anti-nuclear and several lucky breaks like the Oxford Union debate."

During that debate in March, 1985, with Moral Majority leader the Reverend Jerry Falwell, Mr Lange won a standing ovation with a retort which won international acclaim.

"I can smell the uranium on your breath," he volleyed at one pro-nuclear interjector as tens of millions around the world watched with delight.

New Zealand's defence relations with America began to deteriorate from July, 1984, when the Lange-led Labour Party became the government in a snap election in which its "no-nukes" policy was a major platform.

In January, 1985, America sought approval for its warship, USS Buchanan to visit New Zealand.

The following month Mr Lange insisted on proof Buchanan was not carrying nuclear weapons. America refused, in line with its neither confirm nor deny policy, and cancelled defence exercises, navy visits ended and intelligence sharing was cut.

In June, 1987, the New Zealand Nuclear Free Zone, Disarmament and Arms Control Act was passed and New Zealand was no longer an active member of the Anzus treaty alliance.

Mr Lange's award carried no monetary benefit for him but $2 million would be shared between three organisations with whom he shared the award.

However, he said there was no "common philosophical drift" between himself and the other three award winners.

"One is a mixture of the Dick Hubbards and Stephen Tindalls and Jane Kelseys and the other is a straightforward one about nuclearism and peace."

Walden Bello and Nicanor Perlas of the Philippines were cited for "their outstanding efforts in educating civil society about the effects of corporate globalisation, and how alternatives to it can be implemented."

The Citizens' Coalition for Economic Justice from South Korea was honoured for "the rigour with which it has developed and disseminated its wide-ranging reform programme, based on social justice and accountability and the skill with which it is now applying the same values to promoting reconciliation with North Korea."

SEKEM, an Egyptian network of businesses and social civil groups, was commended for its "business model for the 21st century in which commercial success is integrated with and promotes the social and cultural development of society through the 'economics of love."'
User avatar
By ISM
#30083
He seems like a good person. I'm glad NZ broke off ties with the US, and are taking a low-profile road in international affairs, especially concerned with America's false 'War on Terrorism'. If your government keeps this stance, and keeps repelling Johnny Howard (good work, don't answer his phone calls), then I can see your country living in peace for a very long time.
By Proctor
#30136
To tell the truth it's arguable that New Zealand is keeping a low profile. The ANZUS split and the more recent Iraq split have been rather high profile, at least from here. I know that in the wider world of foreign affairs, how friendly New Zealand is with the United States is not that relevant, it matters to us.
By Efrem Da King
#30145
It hilarious, its a bunch of leftwing kiwis who no one has heard off, giving each other awards :eh: .

The fact is that NZ is now has less power than naru in world politics, and its people like him's fault.
By CasX
#30204
Efrem wrote: its a bunch of leftwing kiwis who no one has heard off, giving each other awards


"[The Right Livelihood Awards are] Presented annually in Stockholm at a ceremony in the Swedish Parliament."

You're right about NZ having virtually no power in world politics. NZ has concentrated it's foreign affairs on the Pacific.
By GandalfTheGrey
#30263
Proctor wrote:To tell the truth it's arguable that New Zealand is keeping a low profile. The ANZUS split and the more recent Iraq split have been rather high profile, at least from here. I know that in the wider world of foreign affairs, how friendly New Zealand is with the United States is not that relevant, it matters to us.


As a result, New Zealand is not the terrorist target Australia is. John Howard's increasing reputation as the US's deputy sherif has drawn specific threats from terrorists including al-qaeda. These are not hollow threats - 88 Australians killed in Bali. It has been revealed that Bali was targeted specifically because Australians frequented there. Its quite simple: Howard's blind obedience to the US's fraudulent 'war on terrorism' has made us a terrorist target, whereas New Zealand's refusal to do so has made it safer from terrorists.
By Efrem Da King
#30272
So whats your plan huh?? Hide in a corner??? The reason aus has been targeted over NZ is that aus has at least some power and hey 9 TIMES THE POPULATION!!!, I think they just can't be bothered attacking a country with 2 million people!! For gods sake my town alone has 6 million people.
User avatar
By Yeddi
#30279
What's wrong with hiding in a corner? If the nation is safe and its people are safe, thats all that matters.
By Efrem Da King
#30282
NO they aren't, the terrorist don't care who you are or what you do. They only know that you don't belong to their radical sect of islam (or whatever other religion) and they will attack you. THe arguments you put forth are just like the arguments before WW2, if the west had stemmed german power earlier then we would not have had the shit that followed. Clinton screwed up big time, after about a 1000 deaths he sent 5 missiles at some random place he suspected osama was hiding thats all. Enter sept 11. We cannot hide in a corner and let the world be bullied by a bunch of homicidal lunatics. We must do our duty, and not left the suffering of our ancesters in world wars one and two go to waste by letting our great weastern soceity fall now, it is time for us to muster up and fight our enemys. And those who don't........ Let them because we are better than that.
User avatar
By ISM
#30283
The reason aus has been targeted over NZ is that aus has at least some power and hey 9 TIMES THE POPULATION!!!


'fremmy, just a quick note, we're only about 5 times bigger... but this really doesn't matter anyway. And Australia hardly has power in the scheme of things, so I don't think that has much bearing. However, we do have a right wing government, an immigration minister that makes babies cry, and a heavily pro-US policy. The latter is the one that makes the most difference. Perhaps if Australia was to actively promote itself as disagreeing with US policy, then the Bali terrorists would have thought twice about murdering those people... after all, didn't they say they did it as a jihad against America and its allies throughout the world? Just some thoughts.

Your gung ho attitude is the very attitude which causes so much unrest in the world. Agreeing with Yeddi, why not take the road of peace? Let the US reap the consequences of their own foreign policies.
By Efrem Da King
#30284
ISM wrote:
The reason aus has been targeted over NZ is that aus has at least some power and hey 9 TIMES THE POPULATION!!!


Perhaps if Australia was to actively promote itself as disagreeing with US policy, then the Bali terrorists would have thought twice about murdering those people... after all, didn't they say they did it as a jihad against America and its allies throughout the world? Just some thoughts.



DO you honestly think that the bali attacks wouldn't have occured if australia had denounced the us?? You are more of a fool than I had previously thought. The terrorists stated goal is to destroy western civilisation. Which we are apart of. The bali attacks were directed against and I quote "western interests" not allies of the US "western interests". France had poison released into its railways system by terrorsit (or at least they tried) and france is most certainly a critic of the US.
User avatar
By ISM
#30285
Efrem Da King wrote:We cannot hide in a corner and let the world be bullied by a bunch of homicidal lunatics.


So therefore we should come to the aid of a bunch of homicidal lunatics, i.e. the Bush Administration?

Efrem Da King wrote:We must do our duty, and not left the suffering of our ancesters in world wars one and two go to waste by letting our great weastern soceity fall now, it is time for us to muster up and fight our enemys. And those who don't........ Let them because we are better than that.


I don't see how a series of conflicts primarily between western powers themselves has a connection to a series of conflicts between a bunch of islamic terrorists and a rampaging US Army. You're talking as if western civilisation is innocent, when in fact western civilisation has the most blood on its hands. "Come, comrades, we must defend ourselves from the consequences of the terror we have sown in the past"? No, Efrem. What needs to be done is for the western world to get its hands off the Middle East.
User avatar
By Yeddi
#30286
They're different terrorists i believe, France has its own problems with terrorist, steming from Algeria where they tried to stop terrorism with the army and brute force... :|
User avatar
By ISM
#30288
Efrem Da King wrote:DO you honestly think that the bali attacks wouldn't have occured if australia had denounced the us?? You are more of a fool than I had previously thought. The terrorists stated goal is to destroy western civilisation. Which we are apart of. The bali attacks were directed against and I quote "western interests" not allies of the US "western interests". France had poison released into its railways system by terrorsit (or at least they tried) and france is most certainly a critic of the US.


The stated goal of al Qaeda, for example, is to end what they claim is the suppression of Islamic societies by Western powers, particularly the US. Al Qaeda was formed on the basis of removing US forces from Saudi Arabia, and overthrowing the monarchy there. Now, they are targeting high profile US interests in order to force a withdrawal of American presence in the ME. Jemaah Islamiyah, which is supposedly connected to Al Qaeda, and based in SE Asia, would naturally notice an outspoken mouthpiece of US interests (i.e., Australia), seeing it is just south of the group's own location. Attacking Australian targets such as Bali is quite easy for them. Our best bet is to not stir them up, is it not?
By Efrem Da King
#30291
No our best bet is to wipe them out. I can't remember anything the bush administration did that caused sept the 11th.
User avatar
By Yeddi
#30302
Efrem, they don't care whether it is Republican or Democrat government, the US is the US.
By Efrem Da King
#30320
Well people seem to blame terrorism on the bush administration which makes no sense at all, and I wanted to point that out.
By CasX
#30397
The inevitable increase in terrorism which will/has stemmed from the recent conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan is obviously a direct result of the Bush administation policies. Also obvious is that Bush had little effect when he wasn't President.

Efrem wrote: think they just can't be bothered attacking a country with 2 million people!!


NZ has a population of 4 million.

New Zealand under Labour has, and continues to, follow a policy of no unilateral action. Only multi-lateral action under the UN is acceptable. Also, war is a last resort.
By Efrem Da King
#30472
YOur entire counrty has less people than my city alone, do you really think terrorist could give a f*ck what you did.
User avatar
By ISM
#30492
Efrem Da King wrote:YOur entire counrty has less people than my city alone, do you really think terrorist could give a f*ck what you did.

A city in Australia has 6 million? Last time I checked Sydney had 4.
Norway made Al Qaeda's list and it's only got 4.5 million.

He did not occupy czechoslovakia. The people ther[…]

No one would be arrested if protesters did not dis[…]

Nope! Yep! Who claimed they were? What predat[…]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

It seems a critical moment in the conflict just ha[…]