People may be tempted to call this hypocracy; i think it's classy.

Disliking a system and even publicly arguing against it, while still participating in it, is not hypocrisy, it is pragmatism.

It would be hypocrisy if he started giving out his own award.

Some would even argue that you can't meaningfully criticise a system without experience in it.

Why? He argues that other people shouldn't get awards, but he's willing to take them himself? Honestly, I don't get it. His stance does real harm to young theorists, especially those doing cross-disciplinary research.

But I think this is a minor issue, and don't want to take away from the bigger point, which is the award that he very much deserves.

I think there is a difference between arguing "there shouldn't be as many awards" and being negative about people receiving them. Has he demanded/argued for other people to decline their awards before?