Vu la pression de la logique m\u00e9diatique, qui n’a pas toujours grand’chose \u00e0 voir avec la logique tout court, le Prix Nobel de la Paix de Al Gore (partag\u00e9 avec le GIEC de l’ONU qui m\u00e8ne la charge de l’affirmation officielle de la crise climatique) devrait \u00eatre une incitation puissante, peut-\u00eatre irr\u00e9sistible? pour que le co-r\u00e9cipiendaire entre dans la campagne \u00e9lectorale pour les pr\u00e9sidentielles US. Gore est Prix Nobel dans des conditions \u00e9videmment pol\u00e9miques, comme tout ce qui entoure le d\u00e9bat sur le r\u00e9chauffement climatique. Ce sont les seules conditions qui signalent quelque int\u00e9r\u00eat pour cette distinction. Quand il n’y a pas de pol\u00e9mique, c’est qu’on a couronn\u00e9 une ic\u00f4ne sans gu\u00e8re d’int\u00e9r\u00eat, de type consensuel, dont la philosophie qui ne peut \u00eatre qu’applaudie est en g\u00e9n\u00e9ral que la paix est une bonne chose et la guerre une laide.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
\tLe Nobel de Gore survient alors qu’il est contest\u00e9 par le jugement d’un tribunal de Londres, d’une fa\u00e7on et dans des conditions si ambigu\u00ebs<\/a> qu’on est s\u00fbr de voir la pol\u00e9mique enfler encore.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tOn peut par ailleurs accepter cette appr\u00e9ciation compl\u00e8tement politique, en plus d’\u00eatre pol\u00e9mique, de l’attribution de ce Nobel de la Paix, par Leo Hockman<\/a> dans le Guardian<\/em>:<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00abI suspect, however, that the motivation behind the committee handing the award to Gore and the IPCC, is less about future gazing and more about wanting to make a clear and unequivocal statement ahead of the UN climate change conference in Bali this December about just how important the decisions made there will be to not only the world’s citizens today, but also coming generations.<\/em> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbIt would have been entirely justified to award the IPCC the award by itself given how much global impact the publication of its fourth report had earlier this year, but the inclusion of Al Gore is a potent reminder to the Americans who still hold most of the trump cards at such talks by the Nobel committee about who it feels is on the right side of this debate, with the implication that Bush, Gore’s political nemesis, being still very much on the wrong side. With Bush thankfully now into the final phase of his disastrous presidency, it can be safely assumed that he has his legacy very much on his mind. Anything that can nudge him towards choosing the right course of action on climate change is welcome but I suspect forlorn.<\/em> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbAs for Gore, I wonder whether this will now persuade him to go again for the biggest prize of all? Well, the $1.5m Nobel prize fund should help pay for a few hours on the campaign trail, if he does.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tIl y a presque une exigence imp\u00e9rative chez certains pour que Gore s’engage dans la campagne \u00e9lectorale, et de l’irritation de le voir ne pas s’\u00eatre encore engag\u00e9. L’argument est simple et, somme toute, imparable: Gore a un \u00e9norme capital de notori\u00e9t\u00e9 et de popularit\u00e9, il proclame et pr\u00e9tend nous prouver que la plan\u00e8te est en danger de mort, et il ne tenterait pas d’acc\u00e9der au poste qui lui permettrait d’agir avec le plus d’efficacit\u00e9 alors qu’il voit bien par ailleurs que le d\u00e9sordre corrompu du monde politique washingtonien ne fait pas beaucoup esp\u00e9rer dans ce sens des candidats en lice?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tOn peut voir d\u00e9velopp\u00e9es cette id\u00e9e et cette humeur dans une chronique de Robert Parry, du 11 octobre<\/a>, selon pr\u00e9cis\u00e9ment cet argument que les autres candidats, et bien s\u00fbr Hillary Clinton au premier chef, ne donneront pas l’impulsion dramatique n\u00e9cessaire pour entreprendre une lutte s\u00e9rieuse contre la crise climatique:<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00abI can’t understand why there aren’t rings of young people blocking bulldozers and preventing them from constructing coal-fired power plants, Gore told Kristof, who was accompanied by his teenage son. [NYT, Aug. 16, 2007]<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbYet, if Gore means what he says that global warming is such a threat to the future of mankind that young people should throw their bodies in front of bulldozers then the obvious question to him is: Why won’t you submit to the personal unpleasantness of another presidential campaign so you can lead the fight to save the planet?<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbGore certainly can’t believe that Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton would make climate change a centerpiece of her presidency. Already, she’s acting as if her party’s nomination is in the bag and she can shift toward a general-election strategy that stresses consensus, not controversy.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t()<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbIn short, Gore would seem to have both a practical incentive and a moral imperative to enter the Democratic presidential campaign. At minimum, he could force the global-warming issue to the forefront of the debate.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbPlus, if he were to win the nomination, he could make Election 2008 a referendum on whether the United States will confront real dangers to the nation’s future from global warming to the Bush-era assault on reason or continue to fret about exaggerated threats from al-Qaeda and to accept the erosion of constitutional liberties.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbOn a moral level, a Gore candidacy would be putting his body where his mouth is. Metaphorically at least, he would be throwing himself in front of the bulldozers. He would be taking the personal risks that he wants the young people to take. He would be providing real leadership, not just words.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbAl Gore may have plenty of excuses for not running for President again. But he must recognize that he has some very compelling reasons to do so.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tGore est prisonnier de son succ\u00e8s, de sa notori\u00e9t\u00e9, de son prestige. Il est prisonnier des forces qui marquent son \u00e9poque, forces m\u00e9diatiques et de la communication. Il lui sera quasiment impossible de ne pas exploiter son couronnement comme Prix Nobel par une action politique d\u00e9cid\u00e9e et d\u00e9cisive, et, effectivement, une entr\u00e9e dans la course \u00e0 la pr\u00e9sidence semble bien celle qui corresponde le plus \u00e0 cette d\u00e9finition. Le choix 2007 du Nobel pour la Paix ressemble \u00e0 une injonction du jury des Nobel, une feuille de route vers la pr\u00e9sidence, comme une \u00e9trange interf\u00e9rence dans les affaires int\u00e9rieures des USA, un comble, dans la situation actuelle. On verra ce que le Prix Nobel 2007 en fera. (Et s’il est candidat, la confrontation avec Hillary Clinton, ou plut\u00f4t Billary Clinton<\/a>, vaudra son pesant de cacahu\u00e8tes.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n \tMis en ligne le 12 octobre 2007 \u00e0 15H46<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Vu la pression de la logique m\u00e9diatique, qui n’a pas toujours grand’chose \u00e0 voir avec la logique tout court, le Prix Nobel de la Paix de Al Gore (partag\u00e9 avec le GIEC de l’ONU qui m\u00e8ne la charge de l’affirmation officielle de la crise climatique) devrait \u00eatre une incitation puissante, peut-\u00eatre irr\u00e9sistible? pour que le… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[3392,3228,3342,3644,6157],"class_list":["post-69314","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-climatique","tag-crise","tag-gore","tag-nobel","tag-paix"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69314","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=69314"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69314\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=69314"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=69314"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=69314"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}