Political preferences can be salient
in organizing bodies of entertainment events that are billed as non-political
in nature. This broad inconsistency can in turn allow for others—some of which
may not be obvious. My objective here is to render such inconsistencies
transparent so that other “hidden” inconsistencies can be more easily detected
in the future. As a prime case study, I have in mind the European Broadcast
Union (EBU), and more particularly its approach to the 2024 Eurovision Song
Contest.
Firstly, that contest was
impacted by the pro-Palestine protests because Israel was allowed to compete. More
basic than the issue of Israel’s military incursion into famine-ravished Gaza
at the time is that of why a country in the Middle East was part of a European
contest. Consider the blatant contradiction evinced in a statement from Deutsche
Welle: “The European Broadcasting Union (EBU), which organizes the
pan-continental pop competition, ruled that Israel is allowed to compete.”[1]
Clearly, the contest went beyond Europe. Once the proverbial cat is out of the
bag, why not allow other non-European countries to compete? I submit, with a nod
back to Kant, that the logical inconsistency itself is sordid.
Secondly, although the EBU
subsequently claimed that it did not bar the E.U. flag, attendees were refused
entry into the venue if they had the flag. The European Commission had
protested the flag being signaled out—I would even say being discriminated
against. “Ahead of the final, a spokesperson for the European Broadcasting
Union said ticket holders would only be allowed to bring and display flags
representing participating countries, as well as the rainbow-colored flag,
which symbolizes LGBTQ+ communities.”[2]
Besides the decision to include the gay flag being political even though the
EBU had claimed to be non-political, the choice discredits the argument that
the E.U. flag could not be shown because the E.U. is not a country, for an LGBT
“community” is a social group rather than being anything close to a country.
Put another way, a pro-LGBT
attendee could show the flag of a social issue, whereas a citizen of the E.U.
could not show the flag representing the federal citizenship. E.U. citizens
even have an E.U. passport! I suspect that the very notion of E.U. citizenship
was ideologically repugnant to whomever in the EBU blocked the flag of the
federal union. In other words, singling out the E.U. flag fits with a state’s
rights, or Euroskeptic ideology that denies that the E.U. is anything more than
a trading “bloc.”
As Euroskeptics would have it, the E.U. would be a confederation, meaning that all of the governmental sovereignty remains with the state governments. Historically, confederations have been used for military alliances, such as those of ancient Athens and Sparta. In contrast, the E.U., like the U.S., includes governmental sovereignty at both the federal and state levels. The qualified majority voting mechanism at the federal level of the E.U. alone involves a delegation of sovereignty from the states because any given state can be bound by federal law even though the state voted against it in the European Council, which, like the U.S. Senate, represents the states. Therefore, E.U. competencies, or enumerated powers, subject to qualified majority voting have been delegated by the states to the federal government. By the way, Euroskeptics are also in denial concerning the fact that a legislature, supreme court, and executive branch at a federal level together constitute a government. Essentially, The EBU fundamentally lacked understanding on the difference between confederalism and modern federalism, and federalism itself, and thus misunderstood the basic nature of the E.U.
That the anti-E.U. ideology is warped relative to the reality of the E.U. resulted in the inconsistencies in allowing in a social issues flag and even the flag of a state in the Middle East yet barring the flag of a government (i.e., a legislature, supreme court, and executive branch) in Europe. To be a citizen thereof and yet be reproved for waving the E.U. flag evinced a basic lack of understanding of what the E.U. is. Ideology can indeed impede and even block understanding. That the EBU would claim to be nonpolitical even as it makes the geo-political assessment to exclude the political flag takes us back to the basic inconsistency. My main point is that the inconsistencies all stem from political ideology because it tends to warp knowledge and empirical facts to its own ends, confusing an ideal with the way things actually are. Put another way, the self-centered gravity of an ideology can warp knowledge and empirical facts much like black holes warp space and time. This may seem rather profound for a piece on a song contest, but the refusal to allow the federal flag while allowing state flags was not mere entertainment.
2. “E.U. Slams Eurovision for Banning its Flag from Song Contest,” Deutsche Welle, May 15, 2024.
