My newspaper had an interview with a former judge, and he said something along the lines of: if it doesn't chafe, it will become irrelevant. So tend to prefer somewhat controversial figures over safe choices.

While De Klerk certainly participated in it, neither Mandela nor De Klerk started the system of violent racial oppression in South Africa.

Neither of them started the armed resistance against it, either, though Mandela obviously participated in that.

When did Hume’s party cause any violence?

> monetary price is paid by the deeply ironic invention of dynamite by Alfred Nobel.

Note that net-net, the invention of dynamite probably saved many lives. Nitroglycerin-based dynamite invented by Nobel isn't very useful for military purposes, and has never been in wide military use. It can't be safely stored for long periods or in hot conditions, making it ill-suited for battlefield logistics. Nitroglycerin-based dynamite is primarily used in mining and earth-moving.

Properly stored, dynamite is both much safer and more powerful than the black powder or liquid nitroglycerine that were primarily used in mining and earth-moving before the invention of dynamite.

Much later, "military dynamite", a more stable dynamite substitute devoid of nitroglycerine and more suited to military use was developed. While more stable, it's more expensive, and less commonly used. I don't believe Nobel had anything to do with the development of military dynamite.

Don't forget Obama. He was given the prize before he even did anything.

And then he proceeded to bomb the fuck out of Iraq, Syria, etc.

Obama got it for being not-Bush (What a bar to clear!). It was a large middle finger raised by world, as a rebuke to 2001-2008 US foreign policy.

It was disappointing, but unsurprising that 2009-20?? has gone down more or less the same road.