The Instigator
Pro (for)
13 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Giving Nobel Peace Prize to Malala Yousafzai was a mistake.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/21/2014 Category: People
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,496 times Debate No: 63633
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (2)




Malala Yousafzai is a hero. She deserves all kinds of admiration for what she did in Pakistan to promote women's education.

Malala is one of many other people who fight for rights everyday. She first came to light by writing on a blog for BBC. [1] She got the whole world's attention when she was shot by the Talibans. She has won various prizes and since then and she is currently living in the Britain which might be "permanent". [2]

Giving the Nobel Peace Prize to her is a mistake because she has not done enough compared to the other heros, like Nelson Mandela and Martin Luther King, who also won the prize. Malala was only begining the race, while the other winners of the Peace Prize fought long enough to get the final reconization and spotlight around the world. The Prize given is merely as a tool to support her for further struggle for the cause, (what she already got) which is not finished yet.


You say that she is not a hero, yet in the eyes of many girls that are in the Middle East and many feminists, she is indeed a hero. I know that it's mainly about quality and not quantity, but many got her attention after she was shot by the Taliban and after she wrote a blog for the BBC like you said. Again, what these actions may seem insignificant for somebody to be a hero may be otherwise for other people.

Also, take note that there have been other people out there that have received the Nobel prize but also turned out to be a big mistake as well. Take Barack Obama for instance. He won a Nobel Prize, but did he really deserve that prize? What did he do that made him unique and more peaceful than other presidents? What he did was the exact opposite, considering now that he has been involved with many Middle Eastern countries like Syria and Iraq, both whom have an extreme hatred for because of the many violent actions he committed against those people. So if a faker like Obama (I know the NSA is watching us right now) can get it, then she can too.

At the end of the day, it's not up to us to determine whether or not she is a hero. It is actually up to the decisions, opinions, and the judgments of the people that give out the Nobel Prizes, okay? So even though there are many like her and possibly people who do even better than her, those Nobel Prize givers gave the prize to her and not them simply beause they did not get enough fame or international attention. Sorry, my friend, that's the way this cruel world works...
Debate Round No. 1


You don't seem to have any specific point to challenge this argument.

I NEVER said she is NOT a hero. I said she is. She is a hero in the eyes of every little girl in her country, every girl in the whole world for what she did, for her courage. She was only a teenager and she got shot for her activity. Shame on the Taliban! There is no question of whether she is a hero. Of course she is and I don't deny it.
But, had she really done enough for a prize as prestigious as the Nobel?

You are also agreeing with me in that that the Nobel Prize can be mistake. You said yourself that Barack Obama didn't deserve the prize. I quote you, "So if a faker like Obama can get it, then she can too."
Are you saying it is usual for the Nobel Peace Prize committee to nominate wrong people and give the prize to them? And we should just blindly accept their decisions?

Yes, there are thousands other Malalas who are also struggling for the same causes - fighting for women's education, for free movement, freedom of speech. Malala is just one of them. The reality is the others do not get highlighted or get a good press coverage everyday as Malala. The only extraordinary thing for Malala is getting shot by the Taliban. Perhaps we should give her the chance to fight more for the cause.

What I am saying is giving the prize to Malala was a mistake. You are definitely agreeing with me on this context. Then what is your stand in this debate? What is your point of argument?


I am trying to prove that your argument is wrong is I am con or against what you argue. Thus, I am stating the exact opposite of what you state. I am arguing that she is indeed not a hero and she defnitley doesn't deserve the Nobel Peace Prize as other people in the world who do so much more get ignored and don't win these prizes.

She is not a hero. Simply getting shot by extremists for standing up against them does not make you an international hero that deserves such a prize. A hero she is, but not to the extent of winning the Nobel Prize. Imagine what she will do with the money once she wins it, oh wait - she already did! Guess what? Most of the money she will keep for herself while the rest of it will be given to those girls that need the education. See what happens when you give someone too much money - corruption!

I know that I am agreeing with and disagreeing with your argument simultaneously, but if that is what you are doing, so will I. Except I will agree with what you disagree, and disagree with what you agree with. With that being said, I will also state why she does deserve it, and it outweighs the corrupt ways she will spend the money.

Yes, she may have not deserved it, but now with the money that she received with the prize, she can now finally achieve her ultimate goals. To help girls receive a high education, to help girls have more rights and freedoms in a culture where it is male dominant, and to help woman follow in her foot-steps. With that money, she can help girls learn in school by funding their education, paying for the school supplies, and possibly even build new schools and hire new teachers.

As with her other goals, they also require some financial assistance in order for it to be made possible. Let's be honest here, in order to do anything in today's modern society, you need the money. Doesn't matter where you live, doesn't matter where you come from, or who you come from. It applies to the whole world and is different from the past where many goals and desires could be satisfied without money (which I find pretty sad and pathetic).

Even if she does use the money for corruption, like I said earlier, alot of that money can still be used for her goals. And the money included with the Nobel Prize is actually pretty damn high; so high that you probably don't even have to work and you can start early retirement just off of winning that prize. Even if you still need to work, you only need to work a little bit until you are set for the rest of your life. So although she will become corrupt and use most of the money herself (happens with everybody), that small amount is still enough to help those girls and women in her country and the Middle East.
Debate Round No. 2


Indeed you are agreeing and disagreeing simultaneously, which is amusing.

A hero she is because she has inspired millions of other people around the world to fight for their rights. Malala inspired the teenagers all over the globe and taught them to stand against any injustice and voice what is right. From now on, if any girl as young as Malala comes out of her house and demands for what is right, what is justice, Malala might be the greatest inspiration behind it. And that is what makes Malala a hero. Because that's what heroes do, they inspire people. Malala is a hero not only in her own country, not only in the middle east, also throughout the world. That's why, I'm saying she truly is a hero.

But, being such kind of hero does NOT necessarily mean that you deserve a Nobel in Peace. Why? Because, Nobel Peace Prizes have been given to people with far more higher sacrifices. Take Nelson Mandela, he passed 27 years of his life in jail. Finally when he got the prize, that was the best honor and recognition the world can provide for what he did his whole life. Nobel prize is not about the money. Its about the honor and recognition.

Now just think about Malala. She was already recognized by the world. She was in the spotlight from the beginning. In case of her, though she is a hero who can inspire millions other, what she did is only to write in a blog of an international newspaper about her daily life and the problems she faced. She didn't come down on the road to shout for women's right, she didn't go to jail, she wasn't even active for a very long time, perhaps because she didn't get the chance to. That's why instead of giving her the Nobel we should support her and let her fight more for her cause. And finally at the end, when its time, we could hand out the Nobel to her thanking her for she had done enough. But, this didn't happen. We've given it already!

You also agreed that, "A hero she is not to the extent of winning the Nobel Prize." Yes! I am also saying that she doesn't deserve the prize for this exact reason!

Again, you said she can spend the money for her cause because she needs money. Well that is true. But, hasn't she got enough financial support? [1] Should we give Nobel to those whoever needs financial support for any cause? Is Nobel prize should be considered as a prize for money? Malala also got the greater political support from all around the world. So, if helping her financially is the main reason of giving her the Nobel, then surely it was a mistake. For the Nobel is far more dignified and honored prize.

What you said may spark another argument - will Malala get corrupted getting so much money? I am not going into that discussion, because that is not the point.

Malala has NOT contributed more to world peace than any of the 1000s of others. There are people like Jadav Payeng and Dashrath Manjhi who have done unbelievable wonders.

Hope you will now agree with me that giving Malala the prize was indeed a mistake!


I forfeit the round and close the debate because I do not have enough time to debate; I don't care about such issues and only argued to make you interested; and I have a life.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Ragnar 2 years ago
Interesting premise, however the heroes named were not eligible for the year in question. More importantly, consider some of the deplorable candidates they've given it to.
Posted by Smikes 2 years ago
I'm not particularly familiar with the biography of MLK, but it's arguable that he, too, never made particularly impressive strides in the advancement of equal treatment for blacks in America. He was, however, an important catalyst. And he risked his life for the important ideas that he was promoting.

Malala is similar in these regards. Although she hasn't paid the ultimate sacrifice for her ideas, she is continuously risking her life every time she chooses to speak on the topic of women's education in the Middle East. It is well established that Malala is tremendously unpopular among her peers in Pakistan, and I'm sure her family receives a continuous stream of *credible* death threats. Her political cause, in particular, also happens to be arguably the most important international issue of the 21st century.

Who else is spearheading this effort? People used to look to Greg Mortenson, but he's been discredited as a fraud. Citizens in the Middle East are either against the education of women for political reasons or they are - quite understandably - terrified to voice their favorable opinions. Liberals in the West, on the other hand, are too cowardly to say anything that might potentially be conflated with either racist stereotyping or religious intolerance. Like you said so yourself, Malala is an important political symbol in this regard, and she will continue to be regarded as such in every history textbook for years to come - and rightfully so.

I'm sorry that I'm not officially debating this with you, akhlakm. I honestly don't have the time and motivation right now. Good luck with your debate though! :)
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by VelCrow 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by Zanomi3 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Not because I agree with the claim, but Con forfeits the final round. Also attacks Pro personally ("I have a life") so conduct to Pro. Arguments to Pro, and sources for obvious reasons. I'm also not sure if Con was arguing a side or what... Seemed as if he agreed with Pro at points.