Kazakhstan KAZAKHSTAN 2021 - not taking part

[escYOUnited]

 

[Daybreak]

Well, if the point is just to bash EBU (which like I said might be somewhat justified, I'm not invested enough to care much myself), surely there are better ways to do that than being on the side of an authoritarian country

Not that I don't care about human rights, but it's off-topic here, like in the international sports events.

Yeah that's a super contradictory statement. I really don't understand people who are still naive enough to believe that sports or entertainment can be taken completely separately from the politics and aims of the countries participating; the massive state-supported doping schemes of Russia that have gotten them banned from all those international events alone should be enough proof of that. You realize that everyone here defending Kazakhstan with the "just let them sing!" argument while looking away from their politics is doing exactly what their government wants the average foreigner to do, right?

If the EBU were to accept "democratic" countries only, we'd have a grand final with ten countries at best.

Nice bit of exaggeration there. Since Hungary and Turkey already left on their own accord, out of the current participants the ones that would genuinely meet the "undemocratic" standard would just be Azerbaijan, Russia, Israel and obviously Belarus, plus if you really want to stretch it a few others that have issues with corruption, lack of transparency and such like Serbia, Poland with the government they have now, Romania... and that would still leave a hell of a lot more than ten.

I will say though that EBU having no problem with Kazakhstan being in JESC is double standard, of course.

Also, I'll leave a bit of reading here: World Report 2020: Kazakhstan | Human Rights Watch

 

[ESC94]

Well, while I do agree that the participation of makes the argument of being "not European enough" completely ridiculous I´m just not enthusiastic at all about them entering the main contest.

Don´t ask me why, but I simply feel that way.

 

[tuorem]

Well, if the point is just to bash EBU (which like I said might be somewhat justified, I'm not invested enough to care much myself), surely there are better ways to do that than being on the side of an authoritarian country

Oh Daybreak

And how pointing out the EBU's double standards means defending a government exactly? I included half of the actual participants in my previous post too. It's not my fault if the EBU does not treat everyone equally, otherwise there wouldn't be such a discussion in the first place.

Yeah that's a super contradictory statement. I really don't understand people who are still naive enough to believe that sports or entertainment can be taken completely separately from the politics and aims of the countries participating; the massive state-supported doping schemes of Russia that have gotten them banned from all those international events alone should be enough proof of that. You realize that everyone here defending Kazakhstan with the "just let them sing!" argument while looking away from their politics is doing exactly what their government wants the average foreigner to do, right?

There was nothing naive in my statement. I just look at the bigger picture, in this day and age what kind of good promotion a country such as Kazakhstan could get seriously? No one's been born yesterday. Eurovision is popular but it's not all that, the Olympic Games are a much bigger showcase and yet what do Kazakhs achieve in terms of PR? Nothing. And purposely ignoring a country isn't any different than acknowledging it imo, it won't change their government's actions anyway.

Nice bit of exaggeration there. Since Hungary and Turkey already left on their own accord, out of the current participants the ones that would genuinely meet the "undemocratic" standard would just be Azerbaijan, Russia, Israel and obviously Belarus, plus if you really want to stretch it a few others that have issues with corruption, lack of transparency and such like Montenegro, Poland with the government they have now, Romania... and that would still leave a hell of a lot more than ten.

Also, I'll leave a bit of reading here: World Report 2020: Kazakhstan | Human Rights Watch

I guess the joke didn't translate, although the countries you mentioned are the ones there seem to be a "consensus" about: the evil ones because Manichaeism is nice to avoid thinking too much and seeing nuances. But personally, other countries (like my own) like to lecture the entire world about human rights and all that jazz while their exemplariness in terms of freedoms (of expression, of press) and transparency (corruption, justice) leaves a lot to be desired. It all depends on what is one's definition of "undemocratic" I guess.

But then again, I don't think it's the EBU's place to decide who is allowed to spread propaganda. They should review applications based on a set of criteria and - sorry to say - human rights are not among those. With that being said, there is no real reason not to let them in if Australia is in already imo. That's a matter of logic.

 

[Daybreak]

There was nothing naive in my statement. I just look at the bigger picture, in this day and age what kind of good promotion a country such as Kazakhstan could get seriously? No one's been born yesterday. Eurovision is popular but it's not all that, the Olympic Games are a much bigger showcase and yet what do Kazakhs achieve in terms of PR? Nothing.

It's not about promotion (although in terms of inviting foreign investment and such it helps) but normalizing dealing with these countries and their governments. If one or two international organizations or influential countries decide the human rights violations don't matter and that business or entertainment comes first, then others would increasingly feel the pressure to do so as well until being a dictatorship is no disadvantage in international relations - and we're pretty close to that already. In the worst case you can end up in a situation like with China, how so many countries are dependent of them economically and are caving to their political stances/demands as a result. It's the same reason why people are quick to criticize, for example, attempts to invite Russia back into the G8 or relax sanctions on them - because that would make other such decisions more likely.

And purposely ignoring a country isn't any different than acknowledging it imo, it won't change their government's actions anyway.

Yep, this type of attitude is exactly what I was talking about. Well I'm not really interested in arguing over this and it's not my job to make you change your opinion anyway, I just tend to be less casual about that sort of stuff since I myself experienced my country recovering from totalitarian occupation, about which a lot of foreigners felt the same way.

I guess the joke didn't translate, although the countries you mentioned are the ones there seem to be a "consensus" about: the evil ones because Manichaeism is nice to avoid thinking too much and seeing nuances. But personally, other countries (like my own) like to lecture the entire world about human rights and all that jazz while their exemplariness in terms of freedoms (of expression, of press) and transparency (corruption, justice) leaves a lot to be desired. It all depends on what is one's definition of "undemocratic" I guess.

Manichaeism? Really? Sure, if you think "leaves a lot to be desired" is comparable to "opposition leaders getting poisoned"...

 

[tuorem]

@Daybreak I'll stop there because I see where this is going, so let's agree to disagree.

I answered you because you quoted me, and I understand your stance, although I don't share it.

 

[ESC94]

@tuorem

Well, this discussion started to get interesting. It reminded me of the dispute between @Mainshow and @Realest on this issue.

Now I have to eat the popcorn I just made for another reason.

 

[tuorem]

@tuorem

Well, this discussion started to get interesting. It reminded me of the dispute between @Mainshow and @Realest on this issue.

Now I have to eat the popcorn I just made for another reason.

Oh if I have an audience, then let me reconsider

 

[Sammy]

If the EBU were to accept "democratic" countries only, we'd have a grand final with ten countries at best.

I'm sorry! I didn't want to join this and I have a very high esteem of you since I read your post for years now. But that is completely wrong and misleading.

First of all: by putting "democratic" under quotation marks you insinuate that the term itself is fake and that even the countries who are called democratic aren't such countries. You cannot honestly think that democracy is just a fake concept!

Secondly: How on earth can you deny to the vast majority of the competing countries their status of being democratic? This is not a notion that one should fool around with just to back up an opinion (which I don't discuss here).

 

[tuorem]

I'm sorry! I didn't want to join this and I have a very high esteem of you since I read your post for years now. But that is completely wrong and misleading.

First of all: by putting "democratic" under quotation marks you insinuate that the term itself is fake and that even the countries who are called democratic aren't such countries. You cannot honestly think that democracy is just a fake concept!

Secondly: How on earth can you deny to the vast majority of the competing countries their status of being democratic? This is not a notion that one should fool around with just to back up an opinion (which I don't discuss here).

Hi Sammy,

Put that way, that sounds really bad indeed, but I am not such a cold cynical-ass freak.

The sentence you quoted loses its original meaning when taken out of context: if we get back to the whole "virtuous democracies versus evil dictatorships" situation, by putting the word under quotation marks I didn't imply that I denied countries their status, but I questioned to what extent they are what they claim to be. Having the "democratic" label does not guarantee rights and freedoms cannot be compromised, although it goes without saying it cannot be compared to actual dictatorships.

Of course, I speak for myself and no one else, as usual: I think there is more to reality than a binary approach with heros and villains like in the movies. It leads to one-track thinking and conditions the masses not to pay attention to what may happen right under their nose. Oppressive regimes won't get my support anytime soon, but democracies aren't all rainbows and unicorns either - we're living so many political crises for a reason - hence the excessively low number I wrote: if the EBU were to ditch participants based on their governments, then they'd better screen everyone and have a thorough clear-out.

I hope it's clearer now.

 

[HayashiM]

The thing is, once we would be in favour of "only letting the democracies compete", we need to draw a clear line and establish a single judge of what such democratic countries are. Which I don't believe we can.

I believe there are a lot more European countries in the "grey zone" than we might be willing to admit. I don't want to point out to anyone else, so let me go with for the sake of example.

Our prime minister is
a) one of the richest people in the country (top 5 placement, richer than, for example, Trump)
b) during the last 5 years, recipient of around a billion € from funds through his agro-companies
c) under criminal investigation for the above point b), for conflict of interest
d) a political ally of our president, who claimed he is ready to hand the PM over an amnesty in case it is needed
d) owner of the largest non-tabloid newspaper
e) enjoying the stable confidence of 30-35% of the voters who will vote for him no matter what

Are we still a democracy? I wouldn't feel offended if anyone says we aren't. But I would be very angry if anyone tried to get us out of Eurovision for that reason, we are already lucky to keep participating as things are.

 

[HayashiM]

In a broader picture, I don't believe in linking people's right to participate in international competitions to their countries policies. As a matter of principle. Take the Olympics. During the cold war, both eastern and western block would participate, except for 1980 and 1984, when some of the countries decided to pull out. The recent exclusion of in the Olympics because of the doping scandal is a slightly different story.

The original idea of the Olympics is about having a fair play competition while having a ceasefire, not about including or excluding dictatorships. In my opinion, it should be the same for the ESC.

So, once again, since we have in the ESC and in the JESC, I don't see any reason to not accept in ESC in case they want to be there.

 

[tuorem]

@HayashiM saying in two posts in non-controversial terms what I tried to express all along Děkuji.

Of course like I said, France would definitely be in that "grey zone" too. Past the corruption, lack of transparency, lies, attempts at censorship and reduced freedom of press and speech in recent years, we are past a point where a significant part of the population doesn't believe in politicians and the current electoral system anymore (the surveys and turnouts speak for themselves). Are we still in a democracy because the institutions are still there despite people having turned away from them? That is an interesting question to ponder imo.

Now I'll stop digressing before Sean decides to give me a spanking.

 

[Sammy]

I would argue like this:
Even if there are things like corruption, injustice or conflict of interests in the political caste, that does not harm the democratic status of a country. The essential thing is, wether the institutions and the political process is still according to the constitution of the country, wether there is division of powers, a free press, the possibility of opposition inside and outside the parliament and numerous ways to control those in power (by political opposition, NGOs, press, international organizations,...). Nobody says all politicians in a democratic system are saints and morally outstanding. (#coughIBIZAcough#) but true democracy is strong enough to handle this. So, I think both France and the Czech republic can clearly be labeled as democracies. I wouldn't put them near a grey zone.
On the other hand: members of the opposition poisoned in their own country, universities who are not allowed to teach things others than what the government allows, justice systems that are "reformed" in order to grant direct influence of a specific party in power, numerous changes in the constitution to give even more power to those who root for these changes - these are examples where democracy is in real danger or even abolished yet.

Before I get warned that this post is supposed to be in the politics thread, I stop here.

 

[hijirio]

I swear if we banned the UK and allowed Kazakhstan in the 10 competitions in the past decade, the song quality in the contest would have gone up by at least 5%.

This is a song contest and if a country is very ambitious to display their best local talents (as we have clearly seen in JESC), they are welcome to join the party. I'd much rather these 'undemocratic' dedicated countries than the 'democratic' ones who send lackluster sh*t cuz they're afraid of winning.

Plus, Kazakhstan has been competing in UEFA European tournament for so many years but I haven't seen anybody complain they shouldnt be allowed because they're undemocratic, so why does it pose a problem at ESC?

 

[John1]

What is the EBU waiting for?????

 

[A-lister]

The annual discussion is ongoing I see

Well, we should all know by now that the EBU are complete hypocrites in regards to Kazakhstan and only someone deluding themselves would say elsewise. It's clear to see that the EBU are constantly coming up with excuses and "rules" in regards to Kazakhstan, which either don't exist or are enforced for other countries.

- "Kazakhstan can't compete because it's not in the Broadcasting Union area" : Oh plz give me a break, Australia is not even remotely close to that area and with today's technical solutions there is absolutely no issue what so ever so the argument is just flat.

- "Kazakhstan can't compete because it's not in Europe" : Well, geographically it has a bigger European part than countries like Turkey, Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan combined, and Israel and Australia say hello? The latter even being as far from Europe as one can get geographically. Also, it's the broadcasting area / membership rule right?

- "Kazakhstan isn't a democracy" : Eurovision is filled with pseudo-democracies, and dictatorships Belarus, Russia and Azerbaijan all say hello! Belarus is invited back to 2021 by EBU not even reflecting or giving a single thought to the fact that its regime is torturing its people en masse at this very moment.

- "Kazakhstan will vote for Russia" : Maybe they will, and so what? If Russia getting points is the issue then why not just throwing out all of ex-USSR countries and Russian allies from the contest?

I said it before, and I say it again, EBU closing the door to Kazakhstan has nothing to do with the broadcasting area or about democracy and "human rights", it's simply a narrow-minded view on Europe as a continent and what the EBU seems to want from the contest.

 

[Ezio]

Kazakhstan can't compete in Eurovision, but....


... their song yesterday moved me. Brilliant!

 

[Gabe]

Buzz on Twitter is that the announcement the EBU are teasing for a few days might be the moment at last.

I'm not getting my hopes up too much. My heart can't take it.

 

[rasmuslights]

Buzz on Twitter is that the announcement the EBU are teasing for a few days might be the moment at last.

I'm not getting my hopes up too much. My heart can't take it.

I want them so badly, but it has already been proven that that "hint of them debuting" isn't a hint, since the map shows 40 + the netherlands countries, which means that there is no Kazakhstan - there has been confusion with Ukraine's colour, but they also used those two colours for Ukraine last year in the logo, so it's not Kazakhstan..

that being said, they are saying things: like open up to the map and so on... + would they really tease a logo release, which basically looks the same as last year's one for 3 days? I mean if they do that, like 3 days buildup for basically the same logo as last year is a bit weird tbh.

 

[Sammy]

Buzz on Twitter is that the announcement the EBU are teasing for a few days might be the moment at last.

I'm not getting my hopes up too much. My heart can't take it.

You let yourself again be fooled by Kazhak officials who claim that they will be invited. Whether of not you like it (and I'm not entering the discussion if it's justified of not) the EBU has said very clearly at numerous times that they have no plans to let them participate. I see no reason why this should have changed since.