Close reading
I wonder what he means by this bit:
Considering your Country decided not to give me the Nobel Peace Prize for having stopped 8 Wars PLUS, I no longer feel an obligation to think purely of Peace
What’s the logic? How is that not a non sequitur? Not to mention based on a false premise?
It wasn’t Norway that “decided” not to give him a prize, it was the Nobel committee. Except it didn’t have to “decide” anything because it never considered him for the prize. Ok I don’t actually know that for a fact, but why would it? Why of all people in the world to elevate as a force for peace would anyone pick out Donald Trump? He’s been trying to get people killed ever since the Central Park Five got his condign attention. He loves violence. He’s had a lot of people murdered over the past year, and been the origin of more deaths, such as that of Renee Good. His whole attitude to life and people is the antitheses of peaceable or peace-promoting. He’s angry, he’s a bully, he’s rude, he’s mean, he’s competitive, he cheats, he’s ruthless. He’s not a peacemaker.
That’s just one of the speed bumps in that particular road.
I think he’s saying that he was, in fact, interested in making piece, but purely for the purpose of winning the prize. If he can’t have the prize, then — oh ha ha, look at that, I misspelled “peace” as “piece”. Quite appropriate. Lapsus Freudianus.
Well, technically I think they had to consider him, because he was after all nominated. I forget by whom. I’d be extremely surprised if they considered him seriously, though.
(Not a peacemaker? Look, dead people are quite peaceful. What more do you want?)
“I don’t want war! All I want is peace! Peace! Peace! A little piece of Poland, a little piece of France…”
(From Mel Brooks’ To Be Or Not To Be, 1983.)
From the movie The Suicide Squad