Monday, 12 May 2014


by Daniel Barge

I’m not quite sure where the order came from. Maybe all the way from the White House, or it may have just originated in the upper echelons of Europe's media and music biz, who instinctively know their place in the grand scheme of things. But the probability is that well before last weekend's Eurovision contest occurred it had already been decided that a bearded freak in a dress would be crowned Eurovision winner.

Once the decision had been taken, it would be easy to implement, because, like so much else in the world today, Eurovision is a pseudo-democratic sham run by closely coordinated elites. The mechanics alone are revealing.

In theory, each country's vote is decided by an "egalitarian" (i.e. 50/50) mix of mass voting through text or phone votes and the "expert opinions" of five-member juries made up of music biz people. Then each country votes for the other countries' performers in order of preference. Needless to say, they cannot vote for their own representative.

This arrangement has the surface appearance of seeming reasonably democratic, but the power basically resides with (a) the juries and (b) those who select the juries.

First, it is obviously easier for the five members of each jury to coordinate their votes and swing the national decision one way than for millions of uncoordinated text and phone voters to do so. The juries therefore have much greater effective voting power than the masses.

Secondly, the juries are not autonomous, although there is some pretence of this, with each jury member supposedly signing a declaration that they will "vote independently." The central fact here is that the juries are selected by another much smaller and more exclusive body, namely the Reference Group of the Eurovision Song Contest.

This is the body that ultimately controls the contest it is composed of:
  • One Chairman
  • Three members of the Entertainment Experts Group of the European Broadcasting Union (EBU), an alliance of public service media entities
  • Two Executive Producers from previous host countries
  • The Executive Producer of the current Host Broadcaster
  • The EBU Eurovision Song Contest Executive Supervisor
In other words, the inner circle is a narrow group of public sector TV people. One can speculate on what kind of political outlook this creates. The media in general tends to be left-wing anyway, but in Europe this effect is much more pronounced in public broadcasters, like the BBC, an organization that is a part of the EBU.

The present Reference Group is a particularly narrow-based group that seems to exclude the less liberal parts of Europe with a ruthless efficiency. It is made up of three Scandinavians, two Germans, a Slovenian, and an Italian.

Not surprisingly, with such an unrepresentative clique at the top, the results of the latest Eurovision contest have a rather skewed feel that has even been picked up on by some media reports. In Britain there have been complaints that the jury, which predictably went for the bearded freak, placed the British’s public's popular choice – a sexy Polish duo singing a song called We Are Slavic – last.

This strongly suggests that the jury knew how the British public voted before they cast their own votes, and were thus able to distribute their votes in order to push the popular choice out of the number one slot and so secure the maximum points for their depraved choice.

But why were these specially selected juries so keen for a sexually ambiguous monstrosity to win? Aside from the fact that many of the people in the music business are themselves sexual deviants, or at least believe in promoting sexual deviancy for the wider population, there are a number of possibilities. Much has been said about the result being aimed at Russia, with the choice serving to emphasize how much Europe is about "tolerance" and "freedom" and how uptight and repressive Putin's Russia is – yup, another blow in the ongoing Cold War II.

Considering the sick little Liberal bubble these people live in, that is plausible but it is also a narrative that, even at the moronic level of public acceptance, is beginning to wear thin, as there is nothing tolerant and free about a system that uses top-down power to shove sexual aberration in the public's face and call them "thought criminals" if they wince.

While the timing suggests an anti-Russian animus, there is also another possibility in a Europe that is seeing its post-war secular liberalism threatened by a rising tide of Islam. Choosing a cross-dressing Austrian drag queen who forgot to shave can also be seen as a major "F*ck You!" to Europe's Muslim hordes. Perhaps this result is actually the Liberal elite's confused and cowardly way of channelling its own rising Islamophobia in a way that doesn't directly threaten its cherished multicultural view of itself.

No comments:

Post a Comment


by Richard Wolstencroft The date was December 4th, 2017. Milo Yiannopoulis rode into my home town of Melbourne on his Sedan chair to...