European Union Wins Nobel Peace Prize

Tyler Durden's picture

Ladies and gentlemen, we bring you EUtopia (and an early case of Friday humor).

The European Union has been awarded the 2012 Nobel Peace Prize in a nod to the 27-member bloc's "advancement of peace and reconciliation," and to applaud its solidarity as it continues to work to contain the debt crisis hanging over the euro zone.


The head of the Norwegian committee, Thorbørn Jagland, said the committee gave the award in an effort to encourage Europe to back away from the "extremism and nationalism" that led to major conflict in years past. "This is, in a way, a message to Europe to secure everything we have achieved and move forward," he said while addressing a packed crowd at the Nobel Norwegian Institute in Oslo on Friday.


"We don't have a position on how to solve the economic crisis, but we believe it will be important to solve it and that European unity can be kept so that Europe can move forward. There are many things to say about the economic crisis—where it originated, for instance. Actually, it started in the U.S. and all of us had to deal with it.


"Mr. Jagland said it is "up to the European Union" to decide what to do with the approximately $1.2 million in prize money that comes with the award. He also said the EU should decide how the award is ceremonially received.

Some other news: Bernard Madoff Investment Securities has not won the Nobel prize in economics yet.

The good news: Europe, for the first time in history, has a positive $1.2 million in equity value from the prize money, which is also the cash which will be promptly spent to fill those 0.0x fiscal (and monetary) multipliers of a failed regime, aka fill Belgian caterers' pockets.

The bad news: there is no Nobel prize for biggest Ponzi scheme conceivable, which would logically come with a prize so large even Spain would be saved. For at least one day.

We have reached out to the TOTUS to ask him how he feels that an endless monetary black hole - one he personally will be tasked with bailing out should he win the reelection - is now proudly carrying the peace torch for at least one year.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
zilverreiger's picture

It's true it added to the stability.

Let's hope they didnt just postpone the instability for an instant making up :D


1.2 million should buy a nice rope for all MEP's and Counsil

Pool Shark's picture



Maybe they could use part of the money to pay-off Nigel's fine.

Farage is right; he sure looks like a wet rag to me...


gojam's picture

And Charles Ponzi is going to postumously receive the Nobel Prize for Economics this year.

You read it here first -

Pegasus Muse's picture

The EU is every bit as deserving a recipient as was Barack Hussein Obama.  /disgusted

Monedas's picture

How appropriate that Zilverreiger gets the lead post on this farce !

old naughty's picture

Snubbing the helicopter pilot will mean no more swap.

This is going to mean war no Keynsians-Austrian has ever seen.

He is going to demand POTUS to return his un-worthy award.

buchesky's picture

Is this a post from The Onion?

Gief Gold Plox's picture

Fuck off! That does it! I could take the credit crunch, the financial crisis, the cliff, the soft/hard fucking landings, but that's it. I've had it. Screw this reality, I will gladly be called insane for substituting this piece of shit for a figment of my imagination.

Free Rainbow unicorns for everyone!


I'm off to update my Linked in CV with "Awarded the Nobel peace price - October 2012"

cranky-old-geezer's picture



Satan awarded Nobel Prize in Economics

In an unprecedented move the Nobel Price in Economics was awarded to Satan for creating the lie and half-truth allowing governments and economists to maintain perceptions of economic stability and maintain financial asset values during times of severe economic deterioration.

God was rejected by the committee for creating honesty and truth inhibiting government efforts to maintain these important perceptions. 

TruthInSunshine's picture

This is an Onion article, right?.........RIGHT?



If this is actually true, every day becomes a faster blur as we are whipped towards the rabbit hole. I know better than to chase white rabbits.

The EU should invest the 1.2 million in prize money in rubber bullets. Oh, the irony.

notbot's picture

Hahahahahahahhhhhaa!!!  Ah hahahahahahah! I've been laughing all morning about this.  hahahahahaha!!!  Totally Speechless!

conork's picture

This is an attempt, along with mainstream to brainwash the masses into continuing to accept the euro & EU project

economics9698's picture

Don’t worry the masses have a habit of revolting ever few decades, we just need to direct them in the direction of central bankers. 

Element's picture



Waiter! ...

Yes, sir, how can I help you?


ah yes, right away sir.


Zymurguy's picture

Just one more bite suh, it's wafer thin.

john39's picture

yup.  more fascist propaganda to blind the masses.  remember, one of the biggest zionist mass murderers in history, kissinger, got a nobel peace prize.  need i say anything more?

Monedas's picture

Why didn't Braevik blow up the Nobel Committee of National Socialist Quislings !    Every day I admire Braevik more !

Ghordius's picture

well, that's the "fervent hope" that is behind all things beginning with eur-

a few commenters here might seriously not understand because they have no clue what physical and emotional scars a continent's population can still have from hosting such exquisite parties like WWI and WWII. particularly Americans have not had any war near home since a while

note that "...the committee gave the award in an effort to encourage Europe to back away from the "extremism and nationalism" that led to major conflict in years past...". it has nothing to do with finances

Urban Redneck's picture

So they give an award honoring the very group whose actions are rekindling European nationalism.  Brilliant.

JPM Hater001's picture

You are missing the irony.

Europe will be at war in a year and the Eurozone will be the cause.

Ghordius's picture

sorry if it sounds like I would defend the Nobel Prize committee, but it's not a rule that Peace Prize recipients go on multiple wars right after having their acceptance speeches

Mister Ponzi's picture

And next year it will be Zbigniew Brzezinski for his life achievement.

kridkrid's picture

Shared with Kissinger. This is telegraphed, like obama's award, like hitler receiving time's man of the year.

tip e. canoe's picture

not when they can step up their drone missions and commisserate over secret kill lists...

zilverreiger's picture

zero chance of a shooting war in europe core in the coming 10 years

otto skorzeny's picture

is that like "Housing prices in the US have never dropped"?

Ghordius's picture

don't know, are they "honoring" 27 appointees of the various european cabinets or are they "honoring" the populations of 27 countries that want peace and prosperity in europe? I understood the latter.

even if this "very group" you are mentioning is rekindling nationalism - the sentiment of a couple of hundred millions europeans is still there, regardless

Urban Redneck's picture

The committee said the EU was to receive the award for six decades of contributions 'to the advancement of peace and reconciliation, democracy and human rights in Europe

Peace - not lately

Reconciliation - only if it furthers Federal powers

Democracy - not ever

Human Rights - could go either way, I consider speech a human right, some of my Muslim friends consider religious expression (through dress) a human right

But what is the sentiment of the millions, as opposed to the dream (or PR marketing hype) of the elite?

When most Europeans think of the EU, do they think of the Circus in Brussels, the fact they no longer need a passport to hop an a train, that they no longer have massive change jars which contain a mind boggling and often unidentifiable cacophony of coinage, or do they think of happy days sitting around singing kumbayah and celebrating the notion of being more "European"  and less English, French, German, Italian, Spanish, Dutch, et al.?


blabam's picture

Six decades of peace was probably because of that total war experience + free trade. 

Don Diego's picture

and the US military and their "pax" americana

Ghordius's picture

Urban Redneck, do you actually read my comments before answering them? btw, from your flag and your comments you live in a place that is practically all what the EU aspires to be. The template, practically. And your gracious hosts are - last time I looked - inordinately proud of being both citizens of their semi-sovereign Cantons and of their Confederation, speak their own languages and have their own traditions - meanwhile sharing a common currency and a couple of other institutions. What is wrong with that?

Think again what is the expression of european and what is the expression of national issues, in your criticism. Particularly when it comes to Muslim friends, yours or mine.

btw, do you remember when the Swiss had their referendum on minarets?

Lebensphilosoph's picture

And Hollywood and Superbowl in place of a culture. Fuck off, will you.

Ghordius's picture

and what has Switzerland to do with Hollywood and Superbowl? ah, this constant assumption that the EU is modeled after the US, even from the British

just so that you catch the reference: Urban Redneck's avatar sports the colours of the Canton of Zurich, where he is an ex-pat

HD's picture

When the going got tough, the EU powers that be threw out democracy and installed unelected banker technocrats - and it may happen again in Spain. The people of the EU are being asked to give up their freedom and sovereignty to support the poorly constructed (but hopeful) EU ideal and of course, the banks.

I doubt that's what the people in the EU signed up for.

Acet's picture

I think sending soldiers to Afghanistan and Iraq plus the direct and indirect interventions in Libia and Syria and now the whole Iran sabre-ratling are not exactly indicative of being peace loving.

Sure, a lot of people in Europe (maybe even the majority) are peace loving, yet the media in most countries is propagandistic and warmongering and the politicians that keep getting elected are hardly war-shy.

I say this as an European that has lived in 3 very different countries in Europe.


Frankly, giving Europe (effectivelly, the European politicians) the Nobel Peace Prize for their lofty ideals is almost like giving Stalin the Nobel Peace Prize because the original, pure and utopical ideal of Communism was all about equality for all.


Urban Redneck's picture

I do read your comments, and you appear to be justifying the award based on aspirations and the federal designs of the elite (like the US hopenchange), and applying them to the broader populace, whereas my comments directed towards the daily experience of that broader populace. I think the European people were more or less content with the EU confederation of convenience (even though EMU and Schengen are distinct from the EU), but the aspirations cited in the award are 1) not the everyday aspirations of the people, much their experience and 2) an intellectual stretch which ignores certain ugly underlying contradictions (Using the committee's logic, Why not give a noble peace prize for 60 years of US Imperialism, since it has physically maintained the peace following WW2?) 

As for my quirky corner of Europe. I remember the minaret referendum, and I find the argument of preserving the "integrity" of the eclectic mashup of fecal matter that passes for post-war Swiss architecture to be utterly vacuous. I also remember the EEA referendum (I wasn't living here full time then) where Swiss Confederation looked at the EU Federation and said "No Way, No How."  I also have my "Pour plus de sécurité" poster from '07 (I was living on Lac Léman at the time, but the same issue comes up regularly in various guises), which my black sister has a few "issues" with. Contradictions are as commonplace as Alps around here. 

Comparing the two unions, actual democracy puts a leash on the worst excesses in Switzerland, while a lack of actual democracy enables the worst excesses of the EU.

Ghordius's picture

the aspiration is peace. between european countries. in fact, little to award by a Norvegian prize. I agree with you that it's not justified. I disagree with you on the rest of your comments, which I find unjustified.

I also agree with you that the european peoples were more or less content with the EU confederation of convenience.

but the cornerstone of this confederation design is that each member is still a sovereign nation - with it's own flavour of democracy and it's own contradictions. and this means that the EU continues to be governed by the Council (the 27 governments) and administrated by their appointees in the Commission. with an elected Parliament that can have a say or a veto. I don't find this in any way troublesome, with the exception that your brothers the US rednecks here join the chorus of the Brits in chanting "unelected". As if America would elect a Secretary of State. And you join it by stating that there is a lack of actual democracy. Do you mean more referenda? Those would have to happen on a national level, in the way the Irish do.

This "Chorus" is so loud that we risk the introduction of a directly elected President of the EU - just to shut up this kind of superficial critique. And this would make everything truly a mess. It would force a slide into a Union, decades if not centuries before it would be natural in any way. Get it in your heads (I'm not addressing you directly) that WE DO NOT WANT TO COPY THE US. It's the US that is constantly expecting us to copy "the only possible way".

I hoped that at least you would - after all those years in Switzerland - apreciate my comment on Switzerland being the template - at least for conservative and (classical) liberal europeans. but there seems to be something about US rednecks (I fancy myself a semi-urban european redneck, btw) of just wanting "them" (meaning all kind of national/state order) to "go away". I still have to "grok" this concept of yours - I fear it's mainly a byproduct of your history. Did you ever read anything from Heinlein, btw?

Urban Redneck's picture

Thank god you don't want to copy the US, it is a shithole right now. I think the redneck position in the US might be different from the redneck position in the UK (see below). However, I only lived in the UK two years (one in early 90's and another a decade later), so voting was never an issue for me and I had more pressing interests than the platforms of local political parties. Anyway-

How can a nation be Sovereign if its voting rights can be suspended under Article 7, while its obligations remain intact? I'll give the EU this, at least there is an exit under Article 50, unlike in the US or Switzerland. As the Sonderbundskrieg ended departmental self determination in Switzerland in 1847, and the War Between the States ended departmental self determination in USA in 1865.

The key differences between the Swiss and US "federal" models being the hierarchal relationship between the State and the departments. The Swiss Subsidiarity relationship between the departments and the State is codified in the Constitution of 1847 (and again in 1999). The US Supremacy relationship between the departments and the State is codified in the Constitution of 1789 (the 10th Amendment theoretically reserves power to the individual states but it is regularly contravened in practice to the point of de facto nullification).

On "Democracy" (an irony)

The US 17th Amendment established the direct election of legislators to the US Senate, revoking the previous practice of Senators being appointed by the State Legislatures. However, there is a desire within the Tea Party movement to revoke the 17th Amendment for various reasons.

On "Law"

The example of the Secretary of State is enlightening. The desire within the US is not to directly elect inferior Federal officials, but rather to strip unelected officials of the power to make Administrative Law. Currently the body of Statutory Federal Law runs 42,860 pages (without annotations), the the body of Administrative Federal Law runs 170,785 pages (w/o annotation & as of September 30). However, if the Federal government were to try to force the pricing of eggs by the kilo, instead of by the dozen, it might break the camel's back and there actually be blood in the streets again...

I don't object to the classical liberal ideals of the EU, but when the elite are regularly trying to invoke Article 7, or circumvent member treaty ratification, or enforce repeated votes until the desired outcome is achieved, or expand the Administrative Law powers or reach of the EC & DGs, I think the last thing the deserve is a Nobel Peace Prize (for hopenchange), since I've seen where it winds up and I don't think "Peace" means what they think it means.

Ghordius's picture

hehe, now this is a beefy answer! thank you, I appreciate that. a few comments:

- "more pressing interests..." - IMO a good sign when politics is not a pressing matter

- I disagree, 100%. That's the whole concept behind being sovereign and partecipating to a confederation. You can leave and the others can gang up on you. I'm not aware of any serious explicit threaths (regularly?) being used of using Art. 7, but it requires four fifths of all the other governments - who often govern based on a majority in their Parliaments - to declare you an Art. 2 "scumbag".

Think about it, invoking Art. 7 means that 20 (out of 27) european nations with their own armies etc. formally accuse one sovereign nation partecipating to the confederation of not respecting human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. The article was always understood as a "anti-fascism clause". The implicit threat that is currently buzzing around is that if some of the new eastern collegues start harassing their minorities too much then they would be suspended from the shared government of the EU. At that point if there is no further reapproachment a nation would probably leave, and this would be the typical sovereign act. I repeat: it's the whole point of sovereigns partecipating to a confederation that leaving the alliance is feasible and that easing out seriously undesirables is feasible too.

I had a conversation here in ZH with a Czech that wanted to disfranchise and deport Gypsies living since generations in "his" country. He feels that his country is threathened by Art 7. Now put this in a context of the American Civil War and the Indian Wars.

- The "circumvention of Treaty ratifications" is a national matter. You talk about "the elite". We have not one, we have lots of them, most local, a few "global" and we have to listen and accomodate a few foreign ones. An appointed commissioner trying to do a fast one is one thing, but at the end it's the Council that decides (i.e. 27 governments) and ratifications are a purely national matter. And you can't have sovereigns AND start to tell them how they are supposed to ratify treaties.

Spelled out: If the Brits don't have referenda, it's the Brits problem (with their gov), not the EU's or the other confederates. And the Irish said once NO and once YES. Why? And since when is a sovereign not allowed to change opinion? Anyway, isn't this something the Irish have to sort out? It's their Republic. It's their elected Parliament deciding when to have a referendum or not. It's a question of political will of their elite and their electorate.

- careful with two words here: subsidiarity is understood in the US in a different (political and libertarian) way than in europe. department is understood in europe as a dependent part of a sovereign nation, does not apply well to the nuclear armed UK or France and in theory also not to a Swiss Canton.

- on the 17th amendment I agree fully. I'd go as far as stating that it makes the difference between a Federation and an Unitary State. The classical continuum is this: Treaty based Alliance - Confederation - Federation - Union. Based on this scala, the EU is a Confederation and the US transitioned in the Civil War from a Confederation to a Federation and 1913 from a Federation to a Union.

- "The desire withing the US..." regarding unelected officials. Here I have way more questions than answers. I understood this as a "US redneck soundbite" (and IMHO justified fear) from the times when black and white kids where bused all over the place so that a number of (federal?) government appointed judges could "solve" the "Apartheid" in the South. I sympathize but I disagree with the application to the EU.

- The Roman Plebs fought to have written laws, instead of believing their aristocratic judges on their word. At one point one generation will fight to keep the written laws bodies to an individual human level and size instead of an organizational level like corporations or gov.departements. IMO you can see this as a level of decadence and corruption and measure it by page. But IMHO most people aware of this fact are either apologists of the big corps and enemies of big gov.departments or the other way round. The problem is the human dimension - individualistic or banding in interest groups - in a "shrinking" world full of growing leviathans.

GubbermintWorker's picture

Does that prosperity include Germany footing the bill for early retirements in the other Euro nations?

Ghordius's picture

depends. does it come cheaper than war? if yes, then there might be a thought in there...

Lebensphilosoph's picture

Does it come at the expense of the genocide of distinct Euopean ethnicities? Fuck off.

schatzi's picture

Such as? It becomes difficult to take you seriously when you become that shrill. I'm all for turning back the tide: less central control, more sovereign self determination, less wastage in Brussels, more democratic accountability, but the more extreme our views become, the less likely they will be heard or taken seriously.

Ghordius's picture

I had a pages long discussion here about the EU forcing the eastern countries in accepting the Gypsies living there since generations as full citizens. He was complaing about it and about the "unbridled" immigration policies. Now you are making the opposite case? Come with a clear example instead of beating around the bush.

Sofa King's picture

Actually, they are getting it for rekindling European Nationalism without the Mass-Genocide, this time.  Quite the accomplishment.  Besides, Europe can use the prize money.

bank guy in Brussels's picture

Maybe France and Germany haven't been a war recently, but the killing is still not quite stopped yet in Ireland in one corner of Europe, and the Balkan nations at the other corner ... with quite large-scale bloodiness not too long in the EU past, in our own backyard within the last two decades, the same conflicts still smouldering ...

Not to mention the EU encouraging and participating in various murders of women and children by Nato and its US drone planes etc.

Feels strange too that these prizes were really obviously intended to honour brave and courageous individual human persons who had actually accomplished something, not committees or similar ...

And Americans do still have their 'home' civil war heating up ever since the Soviet Union fell, US government and partner thugs murdering American people on significant scales ...

Waco ... Ruby Ridge ... Oklahoma City false flag bombing ... 11 Sept NYC false flag tower demolitions ... US cops murdering people one by one, like a few days ago that US cop shooting and killing a man in a wheelchair with only one arm and one leg, because he was waving a pen around and the cop felt 'threatened' ...

War is all around us, we just have media claiming its something else

Börjesson's picture

The thing is, the EU and its predecessors haven't played any part in there being no wars in Western Europe since 1945. That is entirely due to Pax Americana. The neutered European vasall states of the American Empire had no incentive or capability to go to war with each other. It is only now, when America is weakening and turning away, that we'll see if the EU has any merit as a peace project. The jury is still out, but so far it seems to generate more conflict than it solves.

The Peace Prize Committee has acquired an unfortunate habit, not least seen in Obama's case, of giving the prize as an incentive toward future action rather than as a reward for past deeds.