Posted on 10/13/2006 2:23:11 AM PDT by HAL9000
Excerpt -
The Nobel Peace Prize goes to Muhammad Yunus and Grameen Bank "for their efforts to create economic and social development from below".
(Excerpt) Read more at nobelprize.org ...
The Nobel Peace Prize for 2006
The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided to award the Nobel Peace Prize for 2006, divided into two equal parts, to Muhammad Yunus and Grameen Bank for their efforts to create economic and social development from below. Lasting peace can not be achieved unless large population groups find ways in which to break out of poverty. Micro-credit is one such means. Development from below also serves to advance democracy and human rights.
Muhammad Yunus has shown himself to be a leader who has managed to translate visions into practical action for the benefit of millions of people, not only in Bangladesh, but also in many other countries. Loans to poor people without any financial security had appeared to be an impossible idea. From modest beginnings three decades ago, Yunus has, first and foremost through Grameen Bank, developed micro-credit into an ever more important instrument in the struggle against poverty. Grameen Bank has been a source of ideas and models for the many institutions in the field of micro-credit that have sprung up around the world.
Every single individual on earth has both the potential and the right to live a decent life. Across cultures and civilizations, Yunus and Grameen Bank have shown that even the poorest of the poor can work to bring about their own development.
Micro-credit has proved to be an important liberating force in societies where women in particular have to struggle against repressive social and economic conditions. Economic growth and political democracy can not achieve their full potential unless the female half of humanity participates on an equal footing with the male.
Yunus's long-term vision is to eliminate poverty in the world. That vision can not be realised by means of micro-credit alone. But Muhammad Yunus and Grameen Bank have shown that, in the continuing efforts to achieve it, micro-credit must play a major part.
Oslo, 13 October 2006
CINDY CINDY ?
Without the rule of law and private property rights nothing but poverty will follow.
I am shocked, just shocked, that Cindy Sheehan did not win this award. This is bad day for liberals, traitors, media whores and Bush haters.
Who's Cindy?
Hmmmm....
No mention of the usual anti-American activities that have been de rigeur for NPP winners over the past decade or so...
Either it's an off-year for the Nobel Committee, or there's more to this story than we're hearing...
"I am shocked, just shocked, that Cindy Sheehan did not win this award. "
For real! You'd think her "get the troops out of NOLA now!" statement during the aftermath of Katrina would have pushed the Nobel "decision makers" over the edge what with their hatred of the US military and Bush.
Something only the Left can do well enough to win a Nobel for it.
Very well deserved. This is an implicit rebuke of the whole IMF/WorldBank/Bono failed concept of top-down aid that treats human beings like supplicants and invalids incapable of improving their own lot in life. Grameen is showing a much better and more successful way to deliver propserity and dignity by empowering people to help themselves.
The biggest step in eliminating poverty around the world would be to eliminate islam.
Shouldn't this title read,
Peace prize goes to Capitalism and free market. ?
It's still a bit early...or am I just missing something? ;-)
below what?
Not quite. Of the "16 Decisions" agreed to by borrowers, pay particular attention to numbers 15 and 16. I would label it collectivism.
Odd press release. They talk about microcredit without ever defining what it is. I read the entire release and have no idea what any of this is about.
This sounds like a great idea for growth in field of collections.
Heaven forbid anyone should follow the American model.
Pore ole slickster, he so wanted that prize.
Meaning the help goes directly to the people in need, rather than to governments. Is that a concept too difficult to grasp?
If I remember correctly, this is a program that loans money to destitute people in order for them to start small, at home businesses. They loan money for things like a stove so that a woman can make money selling rice cakes to workers, or sewing machines so that they can make clothes to sell. I think this is a good program, if it is the one I am thinking of.
I have met Yunus. He is outstanding and the prize is well-deserved.
Essentially his message is that access to capital is a human right.
This man doesn't believe in giving away money, like the East Coast elite foundations. He lends poor, but honest people money at affordable rates and trusts them, with the pressure of their communities, to pay it back.
It works.
This man's mission and deeds are fully in line with conservative principles.
Yes, but it took Yunus to believe that poor people weren't too lazy or stupid to pay back loans.
The prize is well deserved.
This IS the American model. Grameen is really about a close as you could get to pure capitalism in its most benevolent and optimistic light as you could possibly get. Yunus, who has a PhD from Vanderbilt right here in Nashville, started lending small amounts of money to villagers in his native Bangladesh, and found, that they used this capital productively, improved their lives, and PAID THE MONEY BACK, unlike their government.
Here is a quotation from Yunus, who should be a hero to Freepers:
“Grameen believes that charity is not an answer to poverty. It only helps poverty to continue,” wrote Yunus in September 2004. “It creates dependency and takes away individual initiative to break through the wall of poverty. Unleashing of energy and creativity in each human being is the answer to poverty.”
Yunus' model is not in anyway left wing. In fact it has no politics whatsoever, unless you think providing people access to capital is political.
You are way off base. This man one the prize for following what are essentually conservative princples.
Thanks for providing the additional information. I remembered correctly, and this is a wonderful and well-deserved choice for the Nobel.
Regards, Ivan
With what little I know about it, I don't have a problem with it. The issue is though, that without the rule of law and private property rights the rest is for naught. They may succeed in the short term, but as their success becomes common place protection money among other corruption will follow and strangle it to death.
I'm sorry...did I ask something offensive?
I read the complete article and had never heard it put that way before.
It sounded somewhat demeaning.
Not very PC, of such a PC group.
Besides that, I said it was a bit early. ;-) Matter of fact....still is.
It's sort of like saying that people shouldn't bother earning money here because one might have to pay high taxes.
No, its more like building a house without a foundation.
The foundation for capitalism is the rule of law and private property rights.
They seem to have lifted millions out of poverty in China with a kind-of, sort-of capitalism that is not quite so clear on such things. I'd rather that the Bangladeshis had that opportunity to lift themselves out than not.
But it doesn't really matter what we say, micro-credit is a fast spreading phenomenon throughout the Third World, and thankfully so.
Regards, Ivan
I will check in later today for your reply. I need to leave for a few hours.
Small steps my friend, small steps. Yunus is providing the horse to pull that heavy cart.
Many simply don't realize that little mud hut villages have need to be self sustaining. This man began an effort to get seed money, or start up money, to these small groups so they could feed themselves and better their lives.
By bypassing the government and dealing directly with those in need, he created a new way of life.
No good deed goes unpunished. The negative reaction to this man's personal efforts is really sad.
Agreed. This is a good thing. They loan like $25 for a loom, for people who want to make clothes. Banks wouldn't touch these folks, but it has allowed talented very poor people to work themselves out of poverty. That is all some poor folks need is just a tiny loan if they have skills and drive to do something. I like the concept in general.
How many stories have we heard in our country about somebody borrowing $200 for an idea and becoming wealthy. It happens. In bangladesh, $200 can finance somebody who is committed, into changing their lives.
I hope it works. I hope it lasts.
I'm just skeptical (shocking, I know...)
All your base are belong to us.
If this program leads to people overthrowing their corrupt and totalitarian governments (the darlings of leftists and the UN) I'm all for it. But my comments are based on what I read at the link in post #14. It looks like a program designed to lead to little more than a better poverty. I found it interesting that 90% of the loan recipients are women. Additionally it was implied that their husbands are their oppressors, not their government.
Amazing. The prize does not go to some thug (Arafat), or an idiot that spews anti-American tripe (Carter), or some socialist has been (Gorbachev - although I give him some credit for realizing that the Soviet Union was over on Christmas 1991 - then again what about Putin, but I digress). What a concept! Peace via economic prosperity via honest capitalism instead of re-distribution of wealth?
"Without the rule of law and private property rights nothing but poverty will follow."
I've been saying that for a long time. I like your wording, and it's going on my wall.
Good for him...and Bangladesh!
Capitalism and free enterprise.....
those would be new words to most, if not all these backward countries.
I'm just glad the peace prize didn't go to, you know who!
BTW...Good Morning to you! ;-)
Then the Norwegian Committee awards the Peace Prize to an effort that most of us can applaud. Interesting year for the Nobels.
Yunus sounds like the Bangladeshi "George Bailey."
Married people, however...
It looks like a program designed to lead to little more than a better poverty.
But when it comes to the big picture, and what is right for the world and what is wrong, I still don't think the Nobel committee gets it, though this year's prize seems to be much better than those of the recent past.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.