Into the Impossible With Brian Keating - Unni Turrettini: Betraying the Nobel: Secrets, Corruption, and the World’s Most Prestigious Prize (#087)

Starting point is 00:00:01 I'm a misanthrope, yet I am utterly benevolent. I have more than one screw loose, yet I am super idealist who digest philosophy more efficiently than food. Who said these words? Well, it was none other than Alfred Nobel, the subject of this wonderful new book by my friend Uni Tirutini called Betraying the Nobel. And in this episode, you're going to hear about all sorts of amazing tidbits that you never knew about the Nobel Prize.

Starting point is 00:00:29 The prize, as it was known, Nobel Peace Prize, including why Donald Trump was a good selection, according to Uni, perhaps, and that one that Alfred himself may have condoned, if you will, if you can believe it. You'll also hear about why is the Nobel Peace Prize, which is a Swedish organization, Alfred Nobel was Swedish. Why is it given out in Norway? That's kind of weird. I always perplex me.

Starting point is 00:00:52 And you'll also hear about what can be done to restore the Nobel Peace Prize to their former statue of glory, prestige, etc. that they had for many, many years, and some say the gold of the Nobel Peace Prize has become tarnished thanks to being awarded to individuals that we discussed in this episode. So for now, everything you've ever wanted to know about the Nobel Peace Prize, coming up in betraying the Nobel with none other than Uni Turritini. Enjoy the episode. Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. All the way from, are you in Oslo right now, Oni?

Starting point is 00:01:36 I'm in Oslo, Norway, absolutely. The home of the Nobel Peace Prize. And she has written a phenomenal new book, a book that was a creed de cour, a cry from the heart, as they say, that really just struck me so deeply and touched many nerves in a good way. And I couldn't be more proud to become friendly with Uni as she's come to bring this book to the world that so desperately needs it. And the book is, of course, I'm only holding up my early version of it. but it's called betraying the Nobel. And I want to welcome you, Uni, all the way from Norway.

Starting point is 00:02:14 Thank you so much for joining us on The Into the Impossible podcast. Thank you so much for having me, Brian. It's an honor. And it's funny, you're holding up the previous copy. I don't even have that one yet. Oh, you don't? Yeah.

Starting point is 00:02:26 So I have actually not seen or held my book in my house. Wow. I get mine tonight from Amazon. I'll get it in Kindle form first, and then I'll get it in physical copy. They assure me tomorrow, which is publication day, and it's published by Pegasus, and it's a beautifully, it's a beautifully written book. It's a very, it's a very, very quick read. I read it literally in under two or three hours nonstop, which is saying a lot for the pandemic podcasting that I'm doing.

Starting point is 00:02:56 I'm reading, trying to read a book every week or two weeks, and this one just kept me up. I couldn't stop reading it. Oh, thank you, Brian. Thank you for that. Yeah. Yeah, it's so wonderful. So I wanted talk to you first and foremost about about what it's like to write a book like this and why you were inspired to do this. You are aware of my book losing the Nobel Prize, which is about science and kind of my personal experiences with the Nobel Prize and some of its shortcomings that myself and other members, the scientific community, have highlighted to some avail, not necessarily no avail, but why did you, an author who had previously written about the lone wolf killer and has done so much in so many other fields. Why did you write a book about the

Starting point is 00:03:42 Nobel Prizes? Yeah, you know, that's, it's a great question. I have all as in a region myself, I've always been very proud and honored that my home country of Norway gives up the Nobel Peace Prize. And I thought, you know, we were doing such a great job. And then in 2009, when they awarded Barack Obama and before he had, I mean, he had, when he was nominated, he had been less than two weeks in office and he had, you know, given a lot of great speeches, but he hadn't really started doing any of the things that he said he would do. So obviously that price was given for his potential as a leader and what he would do than for what he actually had done. And I thought I was curious. So that actually sparked an interest to dig deeper.

Starting point is 00:04:34 And, you know, you're asking, like, my reason, I love research. So I'm curious, as, you know, in general about a lot of things. And my first book on the lone wolf killers is really about how our culture, how our communities contribute to someone's evolution into becoming a mass killer. And so I discovered that the Nobel Peace Prize is also a lot about culture. And who wins is a lot about the Norwegian culture and Norwegian politics. And, you know, what I found was, you know, that the committee, there's a committee of five people, and they are all politicians. Either, you know, now they're all former politicians.

Starting point is 00:05:21 They're not active any longer, but they have given the honor to sit on the Nobel Peace Prize Committee as a thank you for a long and loyal service to the main, you know, the two main political. parties. So obviously then, the decisions that they make, the selections that they make are political. And that's what I found. And that, you know, really shocked me. And when you approach a book like this, your previous book, you have, you're not trained as a journalist. You were trained as a, as a lawyer or to study law. Can you talk a little bit about your background and what makes you such a good storyteller? Well, I'm not sure that I'm a good storyteller. But I, yeah, I studied law in three countries. I'm a lawyer in Norway.

Starting point is 00:06:11 And then I also, at the same time as I was finishing up my studies in Norway, I studied law in Paris. And so I have a law degree from France as well. And then I did a master in law in Boston in the United States and took the New York bar exam. So I practice as an attorney of law in a in a U.S. law firm in Paris back then and I and I worked for some for some companies as an in-house lawyer as well and in the finance industry. So I come from a very sort of legal corporate world and and that was never really a passion. I mean, I did it as I thought that was, you know, something I was supposed to do. I mean, and what I loved about my loss, that is, though, I got to do a lot of research.

Starting point is 00:07:05 I got to sort of explore my curiosity why things work the way they do in society and, you know, all these things. But practicing corporate law was not really my passion. So, but I've always been a ferocious reader. I mean, like yourselves. I've always been very curious. So, you know, but from doing research

Starting point is 00:07:28 and finding out, you know, finding information, and then to writing this book, I mean, that was a, that was a longer process, you know, so that took me some, that was the learning curve for sure and still is, you know, so. Yeah. Well, you're definitely meticulous in your research. And when we chat more in the future, I'll ask you about that process as coming from a lawyer's perspective, because I think you bring some of that kind of cross-examination, that rigor, that mental, rational way of thinking. That's really scientific about a peace prize, which is just

Starting point is 00:08:04 phenomenal. I want to get controversial for a second. I read a quote from you in an august newspaper. Actually, I've just found out that it has the highest, set forth highest circulation newspaper in the United States, and that's called The New York Post from my hometown, New York. And the following quote comes from author Uri Uni Theratini. Trump, President Donald Trump, is actually exactly what the Alfred Nobel wanted for his peace champions. Can you explain that to me? And was that taken out of context? For it, absolutely.

Starting point is 00:08:40 And when I, you know, I last week, just a week ago, I was interviewed by the New York Post. I knew they wanted to do a feature of my book coming out. and especially because Trump has been nominated now four or five times for the Peace Prize next year. And he was nominated also in 2018, I believe. And so they wanted to talk about Trump and the Peace Prize and also, you know, with the election coming up. And so I did not say at all that I thought he was a worthy peace champion. But he does fulfill, you know, some of the criteria.

Starting point is 00:09:19 in Alfred Nobel's last will. So he has, you know, through agreements and economic agreements and also other agreements brought countries closer together. And so he has built, and that he has done in the previous year. So there's a previous year criteria that actually the Nobel Committee doesn't usually look so much at. So he does, you know, he definitely, he fulfills that criteria. He has done some, obviously, I mean, he has done.

Starting point is 00:09:49 some good things too. So I think it's fair to give credit where credit is due, right? But what I said to the journalist in New York Post is that I don't believe that Alfred Nobel would have chosen a person like Donald Trump, not because he hasn't done some good things, but because his whole persona and rhetoric is more divisive than it is unifying. And I think we see that also. So within the United States, you know, riots and protesting and, you know, things going on there, not only due to COVID, but just in a sort of a general sense of anger and distrust. And I'm not saying that this is all his fault. I think it's a long line of things that I think there's an ongoing, an ongoing,

Starting point is 00:10:49 I think people voted for Trump because of a lot of, because they lack trust in the political elite and in the leaders that we've had previously. So there's something that has to be done there so that people, the general population feels that they have a chance at life, that they actually can get out of poverty, that they are, you know, given just, you know, just, you know, just. wages that are that you can live on, you know? And so there is, I think there's a lot of discontent underlying all that that creates this division as well and also make people vote for someone like Donald Trump who has a very splitting and divisive rhetoric. And Donald

Starting point is 00:11:42 Trump also has created a lot of, you know, sort of, well, yeah, conflict with other countries, you know, with China, with, you know, there's, so there are, and also, I mean, I don't think there's one European government that is in favor of Donald Trump. They're all, you know, he's a very sort of hated political figure in Europe. So, so I think he doesn't have that sort of unifying care, you know, manner and way of being as Barack Obama had, you know, so. So, but of course, you can't give somebody the Nobel Peace Prize just by being a unifying person. You know, you have to actually take some steps and do something too. Right.

Starting point is 00:12:30 And you point out in the article, or at least you're quoted in the article, as speaking in favor of the fact that he did accomplish something that had been impossible for, you know, decades, the Abraham Accords in the Middle East. Israel features very prominently in the book, which as a Jew, as someone with attachment to Israel, I found very fascinating. And I think you have a tremendous amount of courage to write a book like this. Here's what the cover will look like. So you haven't seen it, but I'll show it there.

Starting point is 00:12:58 There's betraying the Nobel. And it has a foreword by Professor Michael Nobel. And we both know there are these rumors that, you know, Alfred Nobel, his wife, was seduced by a mathematician. And that's why there's no Nobel Prize in mathematics. That's, of course, nonsense. He wasn't even married. But he did have brothers.

Starting point is 00:13:18 and his brothers had children and grandchildren, and they are still possessing the Nobel name. The question is, they do not seem to agree, except in the sciences mostly, with the direction that the Nobel Prize committees have taken their namesake prize. In other words, the Nobel Peace Prize in particular and the Nobel Prize in economics, quote unquote,

Starting point is 00:13:41 the Alfred, the Swedish Central Bank Prize in honor of Alfred Nobel, as it's technically known. They've been very outspoken about that. These would be his great nephews, I suppose. Talk to us about the forward, written by Professor Michael Nobel in your book. What is his attitude towards what the Nobel Prize has become and how has it strayed from what his great uncle would have wanted? Yeah, that's a, you know, I've had a sort of a long friendship now with Michael Nobel,

Starting point is 00:14:11 and I'm really honored to call him a friend. And he's helped me tremendously with my book. Because when I brought my project to him and my research, and I didn't want to, I didn't, you know, like I wanted to know what he as a member of the Nobel family. And also he has been quite outspoken about, in particular, the Peace Prize and his has written articles in Norwegian newspapers. And, you know, he's very, he really cares deeply for the cost of peace.

Starting point is 00:14:43 also for the legacy of his, of his ancestors, you know, of his great, great grand uncle or something, how do you call it? You know, he really cares about the legacy and that Alphrault really wanted to create a better world. That was his, that was his goal. So he wanted to, also, all his inventions, Alphraveld, all his inventions, all his inventions, where, were really for the betterment of the world. You know, dynamite, which, you know, is also dangerous and can be used for, you know, lethal, you know, means and war. But it was really meant to, for infrastructure, to, you know,

Starting point is 00:15:29 for, you know, tunnels, building railroads, and it was. So it's, you know, he really wanted to create an, and just a better and easier world for people. And so, and everywhere. So he wanted his, in, in, in, In Michael Nobel's view and what I've, you know, everything that I've read and understood is that all his pieces, all his prices in the different, you know, the science prices as well. And we've spoken about this as well, Brian, that, you know, we really believe that that Alfred Nobel wanted to create a better world through all of this, you know, and ultimately a more stable and peaceful world through all of his prices. So, yeah.

Starting point is 00:16:12 And that also makes it so almost devastating and really sad that the Nobel Peace Prize Committee will just, you know, the five people will just sit there and just ignore Alfred Nobel's intentions and also legal document, which states this, right? And they will just ignore it and just give it to the, give it to people and causes that they deem are, you know, oh, we believe this is a good cause. call it peace this year, you know? This episode is brought to you by Netflix. Most valuable promotions in Netflix are hosting a blockbuster triple headliner Saturday, May 16th. Rhonda Rousey returns to face fellow woman's

Starting point is 00:16:57 MMA pioneer Gina Carrano in the main event. Plus co-main's Nate Diaz versus Mike Perry and the best have you wait in the world, Frances Angano versus Felipe Lins. Watch Rhonda Rousey versus Gina Carano, live only on Netflix. Saturday, May 16th at 9 p.m. Eastern Center time, 6 p.m. Pacific time.

Starting point is 00:17:16 Yeah, and Michael points out in the forward to your, to your lovely book, he points out, he says this prize, the peace prize in particular, was called the prize. In fact, sometimes I'll give a talk and the host, you know, of my talk, or perhaps I'll be on radio or something like that, and the host will call it, you know, losing the Nobel Peace Prize. In other words, it's almost like the Nobel Peace Prize is the prize, as Michael states.

Starting point is 00:17:43 Now, you're a lawyer, and I want you to turn your keen legal mind to the question of if Alfred Nobel's ghost came to you and said, Uni, I need you to take a case. The Nobel Prize that I endowed to make the world a better place has gone to terrorists, has gone to war mongers, has gone to people that increased the number of standing armies on planet Earth. What would you do? Would you take that case, O'Ne?

Starting point is 00:18:09 I would. I definitely would. And because, I mean, he was very clear. I mean, it's not a detailed document, his last will, as you know, but there were some criteria there. And, you know, Alfred Nobel, we wanted, he wanted his, you know, there were really four elements to his last will in regards to the Peace Prize. He wanted his, the winners to be champions of peace.

Starting point is 00:18:39 We wanted them to work for brotherhood between nations, the abolition or reduction of armies, and to hold peace congresses. Peace congresses can be any sort of large meeting or getting people, you know, unifying people together. So, so, and when, so, and that is a legal document. A last will and testament is a legal document. document. So as an attorney, I would say, well, if you have a legal document that tells you that every year you give money to this cost, let's say to find a cure for cancer, right, then you cannot give that money to allocate it to, for COVID, for example. You cannot. Because it's supposed to go for cancer research.

Starting point is 00:19:42 So unless there is no more cancer in this world, and then, you know, with the foundation, you can agree on, okay, well, let's decide what we should give the money to then, you know, next, because there's no more cancer. Then you can give it to, you know, to fight COVID. But, you know, that is what a legal document is. And so there is a responsibility that the Nobel Foundation has in Stockholm. They actually sit with the legal responsibility to supervise what the different Nobel committees do with the prize. And to sort of agree on it, you know, like at least, you know, at the very least, come up with a set of guidelines.

Starting point is 00:20:30 You know, okay, what, you know, what can we include in this prize and what? What can we not include in this price? So there's definitely some issues of, is this really legal what they're doing? So you take the case. That sounds good. I would definitely take the case. You've been very good, competent legal hands with you at the helm.

Starting point is 00:20:53 I want to talk now about the issue of nominations. So I mentioned this in my book, losing the Nobel Prize, but only in the context of why the secrecy period is so long for the physics prizes and the chemistry prizes, et cetera, that when I made a nomination in 2016, I was only told a few different things. One was that I couldn't nominate myself, so that reduced the number of deserving candidates from a million to 99,99, but nevertheless, I wasn't really given that much guidance. In fact, when I received the letter inviting me to nominate, it basically said that it could be for something given a discovered or invented decades

Starting point is 00:21:37 earlier in contradistinction to what Alfred Nobel's will explicitly says in the previous year. It also said it could be given to multiple people, which he did not explicitly say in his last will. And then it said, for the betterment of mankind, which is the kind of heterodox component of the Nobel Prize in physics, that makes it kind of like the Nobel Prize, Peace Prize in that it's attempting to make the world better. And in that sense, imitate the Peace Prize. It's clear to me that the Peace Prize was closest to his heart. Now, given that, they don't really control, you know, who nominates beyond a certain level.

Starting point is 00:22:17 They can send it out to their networks and try to encourage perhaps specific fields. But the Nobel Peace Prize is open to anybody. Anybody could nominate the winners of the Peace Prize, as I understand it. It can have hundreds or thousands of winners. you talk in the book about a couple of egregious examples, not only of winners of the Nobel Peace Prize, ranging from terrorists like Arafat to other people, but also nominated parties like Hitler, Mussolini, and Stalin. Now, can we really blame the Peace Prize committees themselves for who gets nominated? Again, Trump was nominated. I'm no way comparing him to those horrible individuals.

Starting point is 00:22:58 But the lot is made of, oh, so-and-so is nominated for the prize in physics. We don't know who's nominated for the prize for 50 years, which is another story. But can we blame them for who gets nominated? It's not their fault. No, absolutely. That's a great point. We cannot blame the committee for who gets nominated. What I do think would help restore trust in the Nobel Peace Prize as an institution,

Starting point is 00:23:25 as a beacon of hope, you know, an inspiration. for people is if they would make the nomination process public. Why this secrecy? It's not compatible with our world that we have today. Maybe it was 100 years ago, but not anymore. So why just, you know, make it, make it public. And make, and also make it public who nominates and what their reasons were so that we can actually, and then also then people could step up some, you know, people who know something about this candidate can step up and get to voice their opinion so that the research so we know that the committee actually does proper and gets all the information there is, right, about certain candidates.

Starting point is 00:24:11 And this I think I believe would just make it easier for the committee and also make it easier for us to understand, oh, well, okay, so this year I understand because they only had to choose between sort of these 10 people that were actually really worthy candidates. So we kind of get it, like why they would pick, you know, as it is today, we really don't know. And the only reason we know that Trump is nominated for next year is because the nominators have gone public and told the press, right? Otherwise, we would know.

Starting point is 00:24:48 So it's not funny. Yeah. No, that's true. And then they, you know, they send you this document that says, confidential across the top. And I'm like, well, not that many people read my book, so it's effectively confidential that I was a nominator. Why, something I've always been curious about, why is the, Alfred Nobel was Swedish and with some Russian extraction. Why is the Peace Prize given out in Norway? Yeah, it's the only one of his prizes that was given to Norway. And it's

Starting point is 00:25:17 quite curious. We actually don't know why. So this, you know, so what I've, you know, I've discussed this with experts and history on and also with Michael Nobel. And what the conclusion, you know, we come to it is that it was really back then, Norway was part of Sweden. We were actually governed by Sweden. So Norway did not have its own military power. It was very sort of, it was the little brother with no power. And also the Norwegian government that was, there was a government,

Starting point is 00:25:52 but it was ruled by the Swedish king and government. They were really, they showed a great interest in the sort of the costs, you know, in peace. So they favored, you know, they were one of the first, you know, sort of government governments to publicly favor arbitration as a means to resolve conflict between countries. They also gave money to peace congresses. So they were sort of an early, you showed very early on an interest in the cause. And Sweden at the time was the most powerful of the Scandinavian countries at least. So it was sort of a little bit of a powerhouse and with strong links to the French, you know, to the French kings, you know, and sort of.

Starting point is 00:26:50 royalties and, you know, they had very strong ties with European countries. So, Norie was them the more of the innocent little brother. And we believe that after Nobel wanted to give, you know, wanted such a place to avoid, you know, this, this whole thing becoming so political and part of a power struggle, right? So. Yeah. That's interesting. Even, even the process itself of the Nobel Prize is political. Not only the prizes that get awarded or the selected parties who win it. Yeah, we think of Norway here in America as Sweden's Canada. No, I'm just kidding.

Starting point is 00:27:35 We're not. But it's true. We do too. So I want to ask you a question that I've often thought about. In physics, there have been multiple examples in chemistry of, of, of prize winners that did great harm by virtue of the fact that they had been written into the history books for all times is one of the 230 or so, mostly men by that time. When I brought my book, there was only two women.

Starting point is 00:28:03 There had been only two women. The previous one, Maria Mayer, had won since 1963. Now, thankfully, after my book, they've doubled the number of female Nobel Prize winners. But, you know, it's such a small cohort. And there have been some horrible behavior, or some say, you know, borderline unconscionable behavior by winners. I'm thinking of William Shockley, who invented the transistor, won the Nobel Prize for that in the 50s and 60s.

Starting point is 00:28:30 And the question about his Nobel Prize getting revoked because he had advocated for essentially what we call eugenics has come up. Similarly, you know, Jim Watson, a co-discoverer, along with Rosalind Franklin and others of the DNA double helix structure, has said some things that are quite offensive in many quarters. What do you make of the fact that there have been no Nobel Prizes revoked for physics prizes, at least? Has that ever happened in the Peace Prize?

Starting point is 00:29:03 And would it be beneficial if they did revoke some of the past egregious sinners? Save now at Whole Foods Market. It's the summer splash event with great everyday price. on 365 brand ground beef for the grill and ice cream for dessert. They have yellow sales signs on ready to cook beef or chicken kebabs too. Level up with savory marinate, spices and rubs, and complete your cookout with a crowd-pleasing cherry pie and their balsamic chicken salad. Available at the prepared foods counter.

Starting point is 00:29:34 Get Summer Splash Savings Now at Whole Foods Market. There have never been a price that's been revoked by the Peace Prize Committee either. And I actually find that quite shocking because of course the committee cannot know what a candidate will turn into right after they've given someone the prize. I mean they can always hope. But when the most egregious example that comes to mind is really the leader of Myanmar, you know, Ayan San Suu Kyi who's who's who's, who's, really, you know, allowing genocide to happen in her own country. And she was definitely a worthy winner back in 1991 when she won,

Starting point is 00:30:27 when she was a political prisoner and, you know, for the cost of democracy. But all the things that she stood for back then has now, it's no longer valid because of the atrocities that are going on in her own country, under her watch. So and the fact that she's also having a trial for the, the international court of justice in the Hague, and it's ongoing. So she is probably going to go away for war crimes. And do we really want to have a war crime criminal as a Nobel Peace Prize laureate? I don't think so. And I don't think it's, it's honoring other laureates. I don't think it's honoring other laureates. I don't think it's honoring after Nobel's intentions either for the prize.

Starting point is 00:31:16 So I think it would serve the committee and serve the Peace Prize to be able to revoke. And that's just their decision. They can absolutely. There's nothing saying that they cannot revoke it. So why won't they do it? You know? Right.

Starting point is 00:31:30 It's very strange to me. Exactly. I feel like it's the same reason they won't recognize people who clearly deserve the prize in physics, like Jocelyn Bell, for example. They could give her a Nobel Prize tomorrow, but they don't do it. And I speculate in my book because it's essentially the world's

Starting point is 00:31:46 biggest monopoly of its kind, at least in physics. And I think in Peace Prize, maybe even more so, but just as we can't blame them for who was nominated, we can blame them. The corollary is that we certainly can name them for not, or shame them or blame them for not revoking prizes that have been used to bolster the image of criminals in some cases, as you pointed out. And so I think it's not done. In other words, they don't do it at their peril. I believe, yeah, in my book, I wrote about how the Pulitzer Prize used to be more prestigious in some sense than the Nobel Prize is, at least in literature, say. But now, of course, the opposite is true.

Starting point is 00:32:30 And the question is, you know, what can we do? If you were, if it was the, you know, given to you, Oonie has the sole discretion over the next Peace Prize. Do you have a clear winner that you would recommend? Do you have a standard of rubric? I mean, maybe it'll be helpful someday if you and I, we talk about what should be like the classification that allows a person to be selected as a laureate? And then what allows them to be revoked if they don't behave properly? But what would be sort of a good prize in your opinion?

Starting point is 00:33:03 So I think there are, I mean, there are many people that would deserve the prize. I think in general, I think someone who perhaps is not already a state leader, somebody who doesn't have the platform to operate from and the financial means. So I think it takes courage, definitely, to select someone who's maybe not as known, who is, who is, you know, who's not a celebrity. Because that's another thing, too, Brian, is that, you know, they love these celebrities. And when they are pushed, you know, like when other celebrities and state leaders, they're pushing for a candidate, you know, over time, the committee tends to sort of give in because, okay, we'll just give it to them, you know, like, you know, because they've been, you know, harassing us for so long, you know, about this price. And I believe that that's not benefiting the price and increasing trust either. So to have the courage to really select winners that are doing, a lot and would definitely need the celebrity and the financial means and the platform that is given through the prize would be beneficial. So there's, I think they're, I think they're just off the top of

Starting point is 00:34:28 my head. There's actually a woman in the United States. She's been a peace champion, really, for years. She's quite moderate, so she's not the taste of everyone. But her name is, her name is Cora Weiss, and I believe she lives in New York, and she has, you know,

Starting point is 00:34:50 she was, you know, one of the first, you know, to really stand up against the Vietnam War back in those days, and she's just continued. And her whole sort of philosophy and also teaching, she's been teaching in schools

Starting point is 00:35:04 and teaching, you know, a student, about, you know, the sort of foundations for peace, you know, to create, you know, for relationships to be the basis for communication and basis for negotiation, right, between people and countries. So she has done a great deal, and she's written books, and she's been nominated numerous times, and she's on the radar of the committee, but they've never given it to her. And I'm guessing is because she doesn't serve any political. You know, she's not serving any sort of Norwegian foreign policy.

Starting point is 00:35:43 You know, they have nothing to gain from her. And she's not really a celebrity. And so there would be no sort of, you know, and there's no controversy either, you know, because she's pretty much only done good things, right? So, but people like that, like normal, regular people who are making, you know, these amazing efforts, you know, and can really do some good. So I want to close with that, because I know you've got a very tight time schedule with the book coming out in just a few hours. What do you think the Nobel Prize matters to people?

Starting point is 00:36:23 Why is it so sought after? Why is, I mean, the president of the United States, you know, will tweet. about this prize. And meanwhile, you know, there's probably a lot of these people without platforms or even those that have won the prize that would gladly trade that prize for the power that a president wields. So why is that, why is it so obsessed over and why is it important? If you believe it still is important. I believe it is important, especially today seeing with, you know, the, I think our countries, I mean, not in my lifetime anyway, but I can't, I can't recall a time in history, in recent history, where our world has been more divided, you know, after World War II,

Starting point is 00:37:10 obviously. You know, we see these riots and discontent in general in our society, not only in the United States, but here too, and, you know, massive problems with, with immigration and what, you know, what to do. And I believe the Peace Prize, it comes back to leadership. And for the Peace Prize to be what Alfred Nobel really wanted it to be, to be a beacon of hope and inspiration to all of us, not only to leaders, but to all of us as individuals, to become the peace champions we can be in our own worlds, in our own societies, in our families, in our, you know, in our schools, at our jobs. and so and so but if we don't trust you know if we if we if we don't have trust in the institution and in the committee making these good choices for us of course we don't trust the laureates either

Starting point is 00:38:09 we don't trust these winners you know because like oh but that person has done you know that person has literally blood on their hands and you know how can we you know we don't we don't look up to these people anymore and so um we just really sad and I think it's you know I think they they if they could be brave enough to really choose leaders that are unifying that stand for a connection unity and peace and you know through you know and the science crisis the same thing right through innovative um innovative means you know and science and just then it is then we are then at least there's hope that we can get back on track.

Starting point is 00:38:59 And that's where I think the Peace Christ has a role to play in giving us these role models that we can actually look up to when we don't necessarily have these role models in our governments and in our corporations, for that matter. So that's really where I think the, you know, it's important to restore meaning, honor, and integrity, really. Yeah, I agree completely. I see Alfred Nobel as kind of this visionary genius who had all the right motivations and yet would surely be turning in his grave or ashes.

Starting point is 00:39:36 I think he requested to be cremated. I want to close because you make him human in this book with all these wonderful quotes. And he really comes across and sort of a more tender like than I had ever really envisioned him. And so I credit you for turning me on to that perspective of him. and I want to begin with or just end with the quote that I'm going to start off and I'm going to record an intro to it, but I'll record this later. But he said in the quote, you have a quote from him in every chapter. I love it. You say that he says, I am a misanthrope and yet utterly benevolent, have more than one screw loose, yet I am super idealist who digests philosophy more efficiently than food. I assume that if you and Alfred Nobel could get together, it would be a wonderful conversation.

Starting point is 00:40:25 I would love to be a fly on the wall for that. But for now, I want to wish you the best of success with this wonderful book betraying the Nobel, which is really a cry for reformation to use the prize's prestige while it still has it, to do good for the world as Alfred intended. So, Ooni, I want to thank you so much. I'm looking forward to doing a few events with you coming up. I'll put those on my website and we'll tweet about them. Have a wonderful day.

Starting point is 00:40:48 enjoy the ride. Congratulations on another spectacular book. Thank you so much Brian. It's wonderful to speak to you. Thank you. Thank you. Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. If you enjoyed this episode of Into the Impossible with Professor Brian Heating, please subscribe, comment, share, and review. Watch on YouTube, listen on iTunes, Spotify, Google Player, Stitcher. We appreciate hearing from you and our always open to your suggestions for future episodes. For more information and to sign up for Professor Keating's mailing list, go to Dr. Brian Keating.com. That's DR. Brian Keating. Follow Professor Keating on Medium and Twitter at Dr. Brian Keating, DR. Brian Keating. For more information on the Clark Center, go to imagination. uc.s.d.

Starting point is 00:41:56 Into the Impossible is a production of the Arthur C. Clark Center for Human Imagination at the University of California, San Diego, in the Division of Physical Sciences. Eric Vary, director, Brian Keating, co-director, produced by Brian Keating and Stuart Volko.

Into the Impossible With Brian Keating - Unni Turrettini: Betraying the Nobel: Secrets, Corruption, and the World’s Most Prestigious Prize (#087)

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.