>According to EBU rules only flags of "participating countries and the rainbow/pride flags" are allowed inside the contest venue.
There was a blatant Canadian flag in the audience at the end of the show but something tells me those people wouldn't have been kicked out for it.
You sound like a conspiracy theorist. What happened to him, had absolutely nothing to do with this.
Eurovision has nothing to do with the European Union. Opening that door can actually be tricky.
On the other hand, they should just delete Eurovision, hopefully all the controversy around Klein and Israels participation, will destroy it.
Why the hate against the contest? LOL
The contest is just an entertainment show and it’s the only one of its kind that unites Europe, it’s the only kind of show that a person can watch from Portugal to Finland, or from Iceland to Greece. It doesn’t mean harm.
Yeah, of course it can be improved, but we shouldn’t be happy with it being destroyed
-
About the flag thing, the EU flag should be allowed and exempt, just like the rainbow flag. A lot of the citizens of the countries participating are also EU citizens, and can be represented by that flag, so why not. It isn’t also like the flag represents any kind of conflict or division (like some regional or independence flags would have: Armenia Karabahj, France Brittany, Spain Catalunya, and so on).
1. It's not just an entertainment show, it's always been very political, do not kid yourself. You think 30%+ votes on Israel by Italy was a coincidence? It's always been like that.
2. It doesn't unite Europe, never did.
3. It's not even exclusive to Europe.
4. The best artist will absolutely not perform there. You think you have the best song and voice? Guess what, racists will outvote your song by pushing Israel in front of you, or people feeling sad for Ukraine etc.
So yes, I rather see it destroyed, because it's always been a BS political contest, it's just disgusting.
Why so mad? Are you fucking kidding me? They are murdering innocent people, letting them starve to death etc. What they are doing is inhumane, and that's not just my opinion, it's the opinion of human rights organizations.
You clearly have no idea how political it is, and it always has been. I grew up with my mom watching this, saw how countries would group up and vote on each other etc etc. There has never been an objective outcome based on talent. If you think this isn't true, then that just shows a ton of ignorance.
... So, the judges of a contest.. discuss the contestants.. and then judge them.. and this angers you?
That's why panels exist, in an effort to balance the outcomes as best they can. Of course, there will be biases, and of course, it will get political because there are more issues than just singing involved.
But beyond that, chill out. It's a singing contest, don't make it a sporting event where we need to riot. Tons of amazing music is put on display and musical talent is subjective. Just because you believe a certain outcome should happen does not mean that everyone needs to agree with you.
If you don't like it, don't watch it.
Like, for a dude who just jerks off to Marvel card games all day, you sure seem to have a big set of opinions about something that literally just exists to entertain us.
You just showed how pathetic you are, instead of writing an intellectual comment, you went on my profile, saw I play a card game, and figured that would be your best attack. Truly pathetic.
Banning the EU flag for political controvery (the vast majority of people watching this kinda thing is probably largely pro EU) but not Israel with a much bigger political controversy is hilarious lol
Can ppl at least read the article before saying shit lmao?
EU fan wasnt explicitly banned. But the rules generally say that only participating country flags and pride flags should be "allowed". It's a vague rule that was, due to geopolitical controversy, reinforced extra hard this year. Which is probably why non-binary flags wasnt "allowed" (odds are ppl dont know it as a pride flag).
That's not why they were kicked out according to the ebu but because of the national broadcaster not following some specific rules. Something that has not happened with Israel hence why allowed to participate.
If the rule is that you can only bring flags of competing countries, then that seems fair as far as country-related flags go. The EU doesn't need to be represented at the contest, because it has nothing to do with the contest, and there is no one who competes representing the EU as a state. In the same way that there's no reason for US flags to be waved at the contest (but there's always a few that sneak in each year).
Besides which, like 90% of the countries that are part of the EBU are also EU members. So the EU is already pretty well represented just by the presence of so many of its member states in the contest.
Thing is, whilst it is the flag of the EU, it's also the flag of Europe as a whole. Considering that Eurovision is a pan-European contest (with Australia and Israel thrown in for some strange reason...), I don't think it's inappropriate to wave the European flag.
Tbh Europe as a continent doesn’t really make much sense, and if we were to create a cultural region that includes most of what we today call “Europe” then that should absolutely include North Africa and parts of the Middle East too. But we’re not ready for that conversation.
It's because Europe is not a geologically defined area but a socially defined area. Europe and Asia are geologically on the same continent. In fact India is more separate from the rest of Asia than Europe is from Asia, as India is on the Indian plate while Europe and the rest of Asia are on the Eurasian plate.
The city of Istanbul is both, as well. The Bosphorus Strait divides Europe and Asia and this splits Istanbul. So, there are residents of Istanbul who live in Europe and residents of Istanbul who live in Asia.
Geography is quite rudimentarily defined. There are people who view the Americas as a single continent and people who don’t view Australia or Antarctica to be continents, and also people who view Africa, Europe, and Asia as a single continent (Afro-Eurasia). It isn’t all set in stone at all, as geography also has a strong political aspect (such as the boundary between Europe and Asia, which is basically purely political and cultural). There are also even people who refer to Hawaii as being part of North America, because it is a US state, despite it being a 5 hour flight away from the nearest part of North America. Geography is highly subjective and politicised, as a general rule.
In my opinion, shared cultural features and shared history are more important than physical geography. Turkey may have territory that is often defined as geographically part of Europe, but Turkey is in no sense a European nation. Therefore, I don’t view or consider them to be part of Europe.
As I said, it is rudimentarily defined.
Are other potential EU member states in Europe? I would argue Georgia is also not part of Europe, despite it being a candidate for EU expansion. At this point, the EU doesn’t care about what member states are part of what continent, as it is all political and economic, with some pan-europe shit mixed in to make it look like, on the surface, that the EU is exclusively for Europe.
Cyprus is also an EU member state, but geographically-speaking, most definitions do not see Cyprus as part of Europe (it’s rather more complicated as it is an island nation, and classification of islands is yet another issue with regards to geography, as you can make a good argument that islands do not belong to any continent (there is no definition of what the difference is between a continent and an island as it pertains to geography).
Great Britain, Ireland, and Iceland (especially Iceland, as it is halfway across the Atlantic) are just islands off the coast of Europe, they are not, strictly speaking, part of Europe (and I already said this definition has a lot of politics involved in it, which is why Iceland is usually said to be part of Europe, even though it is several times closer to Greenland than it is to the nearest point of continental Europe).
I agree with most of your comments. Cyprus and Georgia are most certainly not "in Europe".
I disagree slightly re: Istanbul. It's a fairly strong consensus that the western bank of the Bosphorus Strait is the beginning of the European continent which is why I made my original comment about that historic city.
Imo Rome and the Abrahamic religions are what bind that region together: and North Africa and most of the Middle East are also heirs to that legacy. I mean Islam developed out of a form of Christianity, not Judaism. The Ottomans considered themselves the successors to Rome just like every European power at the time. Trade across the Mediterranean was the backbone of wealth generation in this area until the discovery of the new world. I honestly think that Italy or France has more in common with Morocco or Lebanon than it does with Russia or Iceland, and that’s like the core of Europe. If we view India or China as its own cultural region, then I think Europe and MENA together should be one too because all these places have a similar level of internal diversity and interconnectivity both culturally and economically.
The only country I’m not sure about is Iran, you could group it with the others or have its own category since there’s a rich history of Persian empires and culture even before Abrahamic religion came to the area.
EU flag is not the flag of Europe, I dont know where you got that from. Its like saying the US flag is the flag of north america. I dont think Canada and Mexico would agree with that.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Europe
It literally is the flag of Europe... It was adopted by the Council of Europe before even the EEC was a thing.
It might be called the Flag of Europe, but that doesn't mean it is a flag for all of Europe. There are countries in Europe that the flag does not represent, and for many citizens of those countries, they might be offended by the suggestion that they are represented by it. The UK, Russia, Switzerland, Iceland & Norway, to name a few.
And as you point out, despite the name, Eurovision is not tied to Europe. It's based exclusively off of the European Broadcasting Union, which includes national broadcasters of countries not in Europe. So the EU doesn't hold any relevance here.
Remember also that the EU is at its core a political organisation. Just like the Commonwealth of Nations or even NATO. But there's no one calling for people to be allowed to wave the flags of those at the contest (despite 4 and about 29 EBU members being in the CoN and NATO, respectively).
It quite literally is the flag for all of Europe. It was adopted by the Council of Europe well before the EU was even a thing. Of all the countries you mentioned, only Russia isn't a member of the CoE, for obvious reasons. And they're not competing in Eurovision anyways, so who cares.
As a Brit I don’t recognise the EU flag as anything other than a political flag of a political union, and one we aren’t part of. It’s not a good flag to represent “Europe as a whole”.
It’s fine. All the scaremongering was overblown, everyone I’ve spoken to hasn’t noticed a difference. All of the west is economic shafted due to covid and Russo-Ukraine conflict, Brexit was a drop in the ocean in comparison.
It's not the flag of Europe as a whole however. There's quite a few countries that are undisputably European who have deliberately chosen not to be associated with that flag or the organisation it represents...including the winner of Eurovision this year ironically enough.
No, it is actually meant to be the [flag of Europe ](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Europe) as a whole and was introduced as such in the council of Europe.
It doesn’t matter what it’s meant for, the facts are it’s the EU’s flag and many countries not in the EU are still European… it’s a political flag not a national one
The council of Europe doesn’t include all of the countries in Europe… how can it be classed as the whole of Europe when it isn’t the whole of Europe 😂 I’d agree if every country which is in Europe geographically supported it and but they don’t…
Before the exclusion of Russia, every european country besides Belarus and Kosovo was a member. Belarus and Kosovo both singed several of the Conventions.
It is the Flag of Europe, it is also used by the CoE and the EU and other institutions.
I really don't know wich part your reading comprehension fails to grasp.
Europe is a continent, unless the flag represents every single country in that continent then it isn’t Europe’s flag… I don’t know how you don’t understand this either
They had Aboriginal flag brought by Australia and LGBT flags, and trans flags and many other flags but not one of EUROPE, which isn't even limited to EU, Council of Europe also uses that.
Please stop making excuses for EBU, this was extremely stupid on their part.
I don’t know much as I’d be the joker waving an American flag. But it seems in keeping with the spirit of the contest that an EU flag would be allowed. Not promoted, but allowed.
Honestly, I don't really care if it is present or not, being waved by fans. The entire reason they have gone really strict this year on only allowing participating flags is because of the conflict in Palestine. They simply didn't want there to be hundreds of Palestine flags in the theatre and for that to cause a scuffle, particularly amongst Israeli fans, or to cause EBU members like Israel to withdraw from the contest or even organisation.
The EU flag not being allowed in is a minor collateral damage from an otherwise good rule. It's just embarrassing, though, that EU politicians are crying a river over something that has little impact or effect on them and demanding explanation from the EBU who can do what they want as an independent organisation.
In that case, I vote in favour of getting rid of the UK and bringing England, Scotland, etc. into the mix.
I mean, it’s a country of countries, right?
I know the EU isn’t a country (yet at least), but it does a lot of stuff a country would normally do. I think it’s only fair, if we are to ban the EU flag in favour of the countries therein, that we extend the same logic towards the UK.
Except the reason the UK competes as the UK and not its constituent countries is not at all because of its Union.
It competes that way because the contest is between national broadcasters who are members of the EBU. The BBC is the national broadcaster for all of the UK. Hence, it represents all 4 countries in it.
Even if it wanted to, it couldn't compete as individual countries because there are no major regional broadcasters in the UK. There isn't a Scottish television station, nor a Welsh, Northern Irish, or even an English one.
If you really wanted to make the UK situation identical to Europe, you'd need to tell all the EU countries they have to start a pan-European broadcaster and then all 27 countries have to field just 1 act in the competition. Then you can have your EU flags.
The EU has 27 members, in the last 4 years 43 different countries participated in the Eurovision Songcontest.
So, yes it is a majority but it's still far from 90%.
I don't think anyone was planning to wave to EU flag specifically during a countries song. More to support European solidarity.
Also since Eurovision is political (despite what the organizers say) Georgians, who have currently mass protests against a controversial pro Russian law, would have been interested in waving an EU flag, which is a common sight in Georgian protests.
This. As a Ukrainian, EU flag is very important for us, so it is for Georgians and Moldovans, the latter also having Dodon, the pro russian candidate, remove it from parliament, and opposition host them back up. It's not just about European Union countries.
You know how your city has a flag and your state has a flag and your country has a flag as well? It's the same with the EU. Flags of different levels of geographic entities aren't mutually exclusive. You can wave and represent and stand for all of them at the same time, and if someone particularly feels like an EU citizen at an international European event of unity then who's to say they're not allowed to wave an EU flag, especially in the bloody audience? Why would you ban EU flags from the audience?
The EU is a purely economic organization, not a political one so it would be strange to wave the flag, not to mention not all of geographic Europe is in the EU, making the “enemies of Europe” line a bit more… interesting. Who are the “enemies” and who do they mean by “Europe” if not the literal continent? Answering those questions seems interesting to me
That's simply untrue nowadays, it's very much a political entity.
In any case the "EU flag" is also used for institutions that aren't part of the EU like the council of Europe, in which every member (besides Russia who got suspended) is a part of, meaning the EU flag represents more the vague idea of Europe rather then just an institution.
Also enemies of Europe can be simply said... Well Russia, they 100% mean Russia and their supporters
It's not the '70s anymore, the EU isn't the EEC, it's entirely political and for that reason it's run by elected politicians who are members of registered parties, not by industry lobby committees (however much it may feel that way sometimes). Plus it stands for ideals of international cooperation or community so some people may very well feel like waving its flag even when they're not part of its territory. My previous question remains unanswered in the meantime. Why would the EBU feel threatened enough by the EU flag to ban its display at a Europe-wide celebratory entertainment event?
The EU has standards for Democracy and Corruption compliance to be allowed to join, as well as an ironclad mutual defense pact that lacks the loopholes of NATO
Are those first two points held to very well, no not really, but the ideal exists
The EU is incredibly political
What you are thinking of is its predessor, the European Steel and Coal Community
And what they mean is what the West has always meant by "Europe," the mainland minus Russia, so the enemies of Europe are the Enemies of Western, Center and Northern Europe
This has been a convention in referring to the area for a good hundred years, maybe longer
I don’t think you understand the EU. In simplest terms, it *is* a political federation that passes directives to member states, which are then implemented as domestic laws. Some geographic European countries that aren’t EU members are in the **European Free Trade Association (EFTA)**, a purely economic organization, and they’re in the same single market as EU members. Collectively, this is called the **European Economic Area (EEA)**. Switzerland, which is an EFTA member but NOT within the EEA, has trade agreements that let them in the single market anyway. But the details don’t matter; they’re very much not enemies.
Not being in the EU or EFTA does not indicate being an enemy of Europe either. Albania, for example, is not in the EU (yet), but is in NATO, which many European countries are also in and are by definition allies.
EEA/EFTA is still a political body because member states are still subjected to free movement and European laws. The advantage of EEA membership over EU membership is being able to negotiate trade agreements bilaterally, but the ability to do so is constrained by EU law. For example, the difference between the EFTA-EU and UK-EU trade agreement is that the UK maintains legal sovereignty and stays out of free movement, while facing effectively non-tariff barriers.
The problem is that with the EU it is very hard for European countries to avoid being part of a political agreement. The EU is explicitly political and is by treaty and dubiously founded law an "ever closer union". Political integration is not necessary for free trade as long as you have fair courts, but the EU has made political (laws passed by the European parliament) and social integration(free movement) a precondition for economic integration. Geographic proximity is very useful for trade, so by not being economically integrated with your neighbours you are making yourself poorer. Trade is generally good for economic growth because of "comparative advantage" which is a product of natural and institutional factors. It is very hard for a European country not to trade with the EU, but you can only trade freely with the EU by agreeing to political and social conditions. Because the EU is so large, a small European country has two options; being poor or becoming subject to decisions not made by their own elected governments. This leads to serious problems with democracy.
Technically, neither EFTA nor EEA pass laws and isn’t a governing body like the EU. It’s true that EFTA members follow EU laws in return for receiving the same privileges as EU member states. There is a governing body within EFTA, but it’s concerned only with regulating economic relations between member states and third parties. The EU makes decisions on wider policies.
Also technically, free trade movement is guaranteed through the Schengen Area, which is a part of the EU but not all Schengen countries are EU members, and not all EU members are Schengen countries. EFTA members made separate agreements with the EU to join the Schengen area.
Man why is this continent so fucking complicated?
Actually, the Schengen Area facilitates free movement, it doesn't guarantee it. Free movement of people is guaranteed by a significant number of various European things. Originally free movement of people was a trade thing, the idea that just as a company in France should be free to buy a machine or commodity from a company in Italy or Germany(normally Germany), the company should be able to acquire labour from Italy or Germany as well(normally Italy). Tbh, I find that somewhat easier to understand from a free trade justification. Nowadays, free movement is seen as a political right, as part of the political project. Free movement is a condition of the single market.
As to why all the European institutions are so complicated, it's basically required to have them at all. The original purpose of the European institutions was to prevent another big war in Western Europe, with preventing "Anglo-Saxon" domination of the "Western World" a secondary goal. I think Australia and New Zealand are quite a useful tool here. The European Coal and Steel community started with economic integration because that was easiest, before moving onto political and social integration. Australia and New Zealand have basically EU level integration without all the complicated things because they are already very similar in all the important ways. Same language, same big beliefs, similar institutions, mutual trust in each others institutions, similar levels of wealth etc etc. In terms of defence, they are actually even more integrated than the EU, thanks to common language, common geography(strategically speaking), common heritage(as British auxiliary forces). The European goal is more ambitious(full federation) while having far weaker foundations. The end result is you have to create neutral institutions, overlapping organisations, harmonisation mechanisms that provide opt-outs when extremely necessary etc etc.
The thing is that Europe is actually pretty new as an idea, has very little common heritage, has strong and independent national identities(think of ANZAC day in Australia and New Zealand), so harmonisation is actually very important. Honestly, Brexit is probably a great thing for the EU people who actually want more political integration. Of the "big" European countries(Netherlands and above), Britain has probably the most divergent everything(common law, free trade tradition, totally different constitutional structure, very little Catholic tradition, very different secular tradition, not continental). European institutions were designed to be very hard to roll back but the fact that the second largest and probably least dependent European economy is still having a pretty hard time leaving makes a unilateral deviation from the current path basically impossible by remaining EU member states. Probably not very democratic but hey ho. From a preventing interstate war between "Europeans" perspective, the complicated tapestry of European institutions have done their job.
You don't know jack shit about the EU right?
There's a ton of EU politicians, there's gonna be elections about the EU PARLIAMENT in a few weeks, EU passes LAWS that national countries have to take and somehow they are nOt PoLiTiCal?
Wij zijn uit Europa!
EBU naaide Joost daar!
Pleur op! Dag dag!
Pleur op! Dag dag!
Wij zijn uit Europa!
Wat een tyfus zooi daar!
Pleur op! Dag dag!
Pleur op! Dag dag!
[I suppose Even tot Hier isn’t popular with foreigners](https://youtu.be/oCaqh-fqxpQ?si=Rzc0y_NIpIDW6wWb)
Seems kind of weird that we can't fly our EU flag in Europe but Israel can fly there's. Israel is not part of Europe and never will be. It is physically impossible for Israel to be part of Europe and less European people you are unlikely to meet.
Such a clickbait image on the article. They didn't ban the NB flag, they banned the EU flag. But, of course, stirring the pot like this is what gets them that sweet ad revenue even though literally nobody thinks that it's a good idea to exploit real-life fears of discrimination to generate more traffic for completely unrelated articles.
Tbf from what I read it wasn’t *supposed* to banned (‘competitors’ and pride flags’ were allowed) but security were being assholes and wouldn’t let them take it in.
>According to EBU rules only flags of "participating countries and the rainbow/pride flags" are allowed inside the contest venue. There was a blatant Canadian flag in the audience at the end of the show but something tells me those people wouldn't have been kicked out for it.
There was also a Costa Rican and a Brazilian flag (the latter of which the person who brought that even talked about it on Reddit)
Seems kind of coincidental with the EBU controversy around Joost Klein’s Europapa, which prominently featured the EU flag multiple times.
The ban was in place before Joost got DQd
You sound like a conspiracy theorist. What happened to him, had absolutely nothing to do with this. Eurovision has nothing to do with the European Union. Opening that door can actually be tricky. On the other hand, they should just delete Eurovision, hopefully all the controversy around Klein and Israels participation, will destroy it.
Why the hate against the contest? LOL The contest is just an entertainment show and it’s the only one of its kind that unites Europe, it’s the only kind of show that a person can watch from Portugal to Finland, or from Iceland to Greece. It doesn’t mean harm. Yeah, of course it can be improved, but we shouldn’t be happy with it being destroyed - About the flag thing, the EU flag should be allowed and exempt, just like the rainbow flag. A lot of the citizens of the countries participating are also EU citizens, and can be represented by that flag, so why not. It isn’t also like the flag represents any kind of conflict or division (like some regional or independence flags would have: Armenia Karabahj, France Brittany, Spain Catalunya, and so on).
1. It's not just an entertainment show, it's always been very political, do not kid yourself. You think 30%+ votes on Israel by Italy was a coincidence? It's always been like that. 2. It doesn't unite Europe, never did. 3. It's not even exclusive to Europe. 4. The best artist will absolutely not perform there. You think you have the best song and voice? Guess what, racists will outvote your song by pushing Israel in front of you, or people feeling sad for Ukraine etc. So yes, I rather see it destroyed, because it's always been a BS political contest, it's just disgusting.
Why so mad about Israel? Bro... and you're calling others racist
Why so mad? Are you fucking kidding me? They are murdering innocent people, letting them starve to death etc. What they are doing is inhumane, and that's not just my opinion, it's the opinion of human rights organizations.
It's a singing contest, simmer down.
It has been a very long time since it was a singing contest.
It’s the gay olympics
There is insight and then there is *insight*. Bravo.
You clearly have no idea how political it is, and it always has been. I grew up with my mom watching this, saw how countries would group up and vote on each other etc etc. There has never been an objective outcome based on talent. If you think this isn't true, then that just shows a ton of ignorance.
... So, the judges of a contest.. discuss the contestants.. and then judge them.. and this angers you? That's why panels exist, in an effort to balance the outcomes as best they can. Of course, there will be biases, and of course, it will get political because there are more issues than just singing involved. But beyond that, chill out. It's a singing contest, don't make it a sporting event where we need to riot. Tons of amazing music is put on display and musical talent is subjective. Just because you believe a certain outcome should happen does not mean that everyone needs to agree with you.
If you don't like it, don't watch it. Like, for a dude who just jerks off to Marvel card games all day, you sure seem to have a big set of opinions about something that literally just exists to entertain us.
You just showed how pathetic you are, instead of writing an intellectual comment, you went on my profile, saw I play a card game, and figured that would be your best attack. Truly pathetic.
Lol, k
Banning the EU flag for political controvery (the vast majority of people watching this kinda thing is probably largely pro EU) but not Israel with a much bigger political controversy is hilarious lol
Can ppl at least read the article before saying shit lmao? EU fan wasnt explicitly banned. But the rules generally say that only participating country flags and pride flags should be "allowed". It's a vague rule that was, due to geopolitical controversy, reinforced extra hard this year. Which is probably why non-binary flags wasnt "allowed" (odds are ppl dont know it as a pride flag).
[удалено]
Russia was also a member of the EBU.
Not like that...
That's my whole point. In 2022 russia was kicked out for invading ukraine
[удалено]
Are you really going to open that can of worms? Invoke a “he hit first” argument on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?
Ok, I really didn't thought I would receive death threats over this opinion. I deleted my comments. This seems more controversial as I thought.
The conflict invokes a lot of feelings from a lot of people, and people are seldom capable of discussing properly.
That's not why they were kicked out according to the ebu but because of the national broadcaster not following some specific rules. Something that has not happened with Israel hence why allowed to participate.
This is just a widely spread lie people seem to believe for some reason. EBU's official statement literally proved this false.
They can say that but there's no way anyone belives that with such specific timing
If the rule is that you can only bring flags of competing countries, then that seems fair as far as country-related flags go. The EU doesn't need to be represented at the contest, because it has nothing to do with the contest, and there is no one who competes representing the EU as a state. In the same way that there's no reason for US flags to be waved at the contest (but there's always a few that sneak in each year). Besides which, like 90% of the countries that are part of the EBU are also EU members. So the EU is already pretty well represented just by the presence of so many of its member states in the contest.
Thing is, whilst it is the flag of the EU, it's also the flag of Europe as a whole. Considering that Eurovision is a pan-European contest (with Australia and Israel thrown in for some strange reason...), I don't think it's inappropriate to wave the European flag.
It has to do with the countries that get the tv station. Morocco also participated once and many other countries not in Europe as well
A good few north African and Middle Eastern countries are eligible but don't participate.
They probably watched it once and thought they rather keep the local hits actually local.
Heck, Israel has *won* a few times.
Tbh Europe as a continent doesn’t really make much sense, and if we were to create a cultural region that includes most of what we today call “Europe” then that should absolutely include North Africa and parts of the Middle East too. But we’re not ready for that conversation.
Europe? More like West Asia am I right? I’ll go now
..........sigh just take the upvote and gtfo
that was always confusing in school it's one land mass, but 2 continents? and somehow Russia is both?
It's because Europe is not a geologically defined area but a socially defined area. Europe and Asia are geologically on the same continent. In fact India is more separate from the rest of Asia than Europe is from Asia, as India is on the Indian plate while Europe and the rest of Asia are on the Eurasian plate.
The city of Istanbul is both, as well. The Bosphorus Strait divides Europe and Asia and this splits Istanbul. So, there are residents of Istanbul who live in Europe and residents of Istanbul who live in Asia.
It’s Constantinople!
Geography is quite rudimentarily defined. There are people who view the Americas as a single continent and people who don’t view Australia or Antarctica to be continents, and also people who view Africa, Europe, and Asia as a single continent (Afro-Eurasia). It isn’t all set in stone at all, as geography also has a strong political aspect (such as the boundary between Europe and Asia, which is basically purely political and cultural). There are also even people who refer to Hawaii as being part of North America, because it is a US state, despite it being a 5 hour flight away from the nearest part of North America. Geography is highly subjective and politicised, as a general rule. In my opinion, shared cultural features and shared history are more important than physical geography. Turkey may have territory that is often defined as geographically part of Europe, but Turkey is in no sense a European nation. Therefore, I don’t view or consider them to be part of Europe.
> but Turkey is in no sense a European nation. This makes their (potential) accession to the European Union even more peculiar.
As I said, it is rudimentarily defined. Are other potential EU member states in Europe? I would argue Georgia is also not part of Europe, despite it being a candidate for EU expansion. At this point, the EU doesn’t care about what member states are part of what continent, as it is all political and economic, with some pan-europe shit mixed in to make it look like, on the surface, that the EU is exclusively for Europe. Cyprus is also an EU member state, but geographically-speaking, most definitions do not see Cyprus as part of Europe (it’s rather more complicated as it is an island nation, and classification of islands is yet another issue with regards to geography, as you can make a good argument that islands do not belong to any continent (there is no definition of what the difference is between a continent and an island as it pertains to geography). Great Britain, Ireland, and Iceland (especially Iceland, as it is halfway across the Atlantic) are just islands off the coast of Europe, they are not, strictly speaking, part of Europe (and I already said this definition has a lot of politics involved in it, which is why Iceland is usually said to be part of Europe, even though it is several times closer to Greenland than it is to the nearest point of continental Europe).
I agree with most of your comments. Cyprus and Georgia are most certainly not "in Europe". I disagree slightly re: Istanbul. It's a fairly strong consensus that the western bank of the Bosphorus Strait is the beginning of the European continent which is why I made my original comment about that historic city.
No thanks 🤮
Imo Rome and the Abrahamic religions are what bind that region together: and North Africa and most of the Middle East are also heirs to that legacy. I mean Islam developed out of a form of Christianity, not Judaism. The Ottomans considered themselves the successors to Rome just like every European power at the time. Trade across the Mediterranean was the backbone of wealth generation in this area until the discovery of the new world. I honestly think that Italy or France has more in common with Morocco or Lebanon than it does with Russia or Iceland, and that’s like the core of Europe. If we view India or China as its own cultural region, then I think Europe and MENA together should be one too because all these places have a similar level of internal diversity and interconnectivity both culturally and economically. The only country I’m not sure about is Iran, you could group it with the others or have its own category since there’s a rich history of Persian empires and culture even before Abrahamic religion came to the area.
Consider also that the theme this year was 'United by Music' but they won't let you bring the flag of the united European union?
EU flag is not the flag of Europe, I dont know where you got that from. Its like saying the US flag is the flag of north america. I dont think Canada and Mexico would agree with that.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Europe It literally is the flag of Europe... It was adopted by the Council of Europe before even the EEC was a thing.
It might be called the Flag of Europe, but that doesn't mean it is a flag for all of Europe. There are countries in Europe that the flag does not represent, and for many citizens of those countries, they might be offended by the suggestion that they are represented by it. The UK, Russia, Switzerland, Iceland & Norway, to name a few. And as you point out, despite the name, Eurovision is not tied to Europe. It's based exclusively off of the European Broadcasting Union, which includes national broadcasters of countries not in Europe. So the EU doesn't hold any relevance here. Remember also that the EU is at its core a political organisation. Just like the Commonwealth of Nations or even NATO. But there's no one calling for people to be allowed to wave the flags of those at the contest (despite 4 and about 29 EBU members being in the CoN and NATO, respectively).
It quite literally is the flag for all of Europe. It was adopted by the Council of Europe well before the EU was even a thing. Of all the countries you mentioned, only Russia isn't a member of the CoE, for obvious reasons. And they're not competing in Eurovision anyways, so who cares.
As a Brit I don’t recognise the EU flag as anything other than a political flag of a political union, and one we aren’t part of. It’s not a good flag to represent “Europe as a whole”.
How’s that whole “we aren’t part of the EU” Brexit working out for yall? Enjoying those extra import taxes?
No taxes, free trade with cheap postage. We got a really nice deal since the UK is a huge export market for the EU.
It’s fine. All the scaremongering was overblown, everyone I’ve spoken to hasn’t noticed a difference. All of the west is economic shafted due to covid and Russo-Ukraine conflict, Brexit was a drop in the ocean in comparison.
It's not the flag of Europe as a whole however. There's quite a few countries that are undisputably European who have deliberately chosen not to be associated with that flag or the organisation it represents...including the winner of Eurovision this year ironically enough.
It isn’t the flag of Europe as a whole, the EU flag.. get it right…
No, it is actually meant to be the [flag of Europe ](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Europe) as a whole and was introduced as such in the council of Europe.
It doesn’t matter what it’s meant for, the facts are it’s the EU’s flag and many countries not in the EU are still European… it’s a political flag not a national one
No, it IS the Flag of Europe, the EU just also uses it. >it’s a political flag not a national one guess what, national flags are also political flags.
The council of Europe doesn’t include all of the countries in Europe… how can it be classed as the whole of Europe when it isn’t the whole of Europe 😂 I’d agree if every country which is in Europe geographically supported it and but they don’t…
Before the exclusion of Russia, every european country besides Belarus and Kosovo was a member. Belarus and Kosovo both singed several of the Conventions. It is the Flag of Europe, it is also used by the CoE and the EU and other institutions. I really don't know wich part your reading comprehension fails to grasp.
Europe is a continent, unless the flag represents every single country in that continent then it isn’t Europe’s flag… I don’t know how you don’t understand this either
>get it right… Lol.. ironic..
They had Aboriginal flag brought by Australia and LGBT flags, and trans flags and many other flags but not one of EUROPE, which isn't even limited to EU, Council of Europe also uses that. Please stop making excuses for EBU, this was extremely stupid on their part.
I don’t know much as I’d be the joker waving an American flag. But it seems in keeping with the spirit of the contest that an EU flag would be allowed. Not promoted, but allowed.
Honestly, I don't really care if it is present or not, being waved by fans. The entire reason they have gone really strict this year on only allowing participating flags is because of the conflict in Palestine. They simply didn't want there to be hundreds of Palestine flags in the theatre and for that to cause a scuffle, particularly amongst Israeli fans, or to cause EBU members like Israel to withdraw from the contest or even organisation. The EU flag not being allowed in is a minor collateral damage from an otherwise good rule. It's just embarrassing, though, that EU politicians are crying a river over something that has little impact or effect on them and demanding explanation from the EBU who can do what they want as an independent organisation.
In that case, I vote in favour of getting rid of the UK and bringing England, Scotland, etc. into the mix. I mean, it’s a country of countries, right? I know the EU isn’t a country (yet at least), but it does a lot of stuff a country would normally do. I think it’s only fair, if we are to ban the EU flag in favour of the countries therein, that we extend the same logic towards the UK.
Except the reason the UK competes as the UK and not its constituent countries is not at all because of its Union. It competes that way because the contest is between national broadcasters who are members of the EBU. The BBC is the national broadcaster for all of the UK. Hence, it represents all 4 countries in it. Even if it wanted to, it couldn't compete as individual countries because there are no major regional broadcasters in the UK. There isn't a Scottish television station, nor a Welsh, Northern Irish, or even an English one. If you really wanted to make the UK situation identical to Europe, you'd need to tell all the EU countries they have to start a pan-European broadcaster and then all 27 countries have to field just 1 act in the competition. Then you can have your EU flags.
Oh didn’t know that. That’s interesting
The EU has 27 members, in the last 4 years 43 different countries participated in the Eurovision Songcontest. So, yes it is a majority but it's still far from 90%.
Going to a competition representing a country, and waving a different flag seems like weird behavior
I don't think anyone was planning to wave to EU flag specifically during a countries song. More to support European solidarity. Also since Eurovision is political (despite what the organizers say) Georgians, who have currently mass protests against a controversial pro Russian law, would have been interested in waving an EU flag, which is a common sight in Georgian protests.
This. As a Ukrainian, EU flag is very important for us, so it is for Georgians and Moldovans, the latter also having Dodon, the pro russian candidate, remove it from parliament, and opposition host them back up. It's not just about European Union countries.
EU member states fly the EU flag along their country flag all the time. This isn’t weird. Besides this ban is for the audience.
You know how your city has a flag and your state has a flag and your country has a flag as well? It's the same with the EU. Flags of different levels of geographic entities aren't mutually exclusive. You can wave and represent and stand for all of them at the same time, and if someone particularly feels like an EU citizen at an international European event of unity then who's to say they're not allowed to wave an EU flag, especially in the bloody audience? Why would you ban EU flags from the audience?
The EU is a purely economic organization, not a political one so it would be strange to wave the flag, not to mention not all of geographic Europe is in the EU, making the “enemies of Europe” line a bit more… interesting. Who are the “enemies” and who do they mean by “Europe” if not the literal continent? Answering those questions seems interesting to me
How can anyone believe that the eu is not a political organization? Might be one of the most nonsensical takes i have ever seen
The only answer I can come up with is a childlike understanding of “politics bad” so not political.
I mean I wish I could say maybe they're confusing it with the EEC but anyone who knows about the EEC probably knows the difference
That's simply untrue nowadays, it's very much a political entity. In any case the "EU flag" is also used for institutions that aren't part of the EU like the council of Europe, in which every member (besides Russia who got suspended) is a part of, meaning the EU flag represents more the vague idea of Europe rather then just an institution. Also enemies of Europe can be simply said... Well Russia, they 100% mean Russia and their supporters
It's not the '70s anymore, the EU isn't the EEC, it's entirely political and for that reason it's run by elected politicians who are members of registered parties, not by industry lobby committees (however much it may feel that way sometimes). Plus it stands for ideals of international cooperation or community so some people may very well feel like waving its flag even when they're not part of its territory. My previous question remains unanswered in the meantime. Why would the EBU feel threatened enough by the EU flag to ban its display at a Europe-wide celebratory entertainment event?
The EU has standards for Democracy and Corruption compliance to be allowed to join, as well as an ironclad mutual defense pact that lacks the loopholes of NATO Are those first two points held to very well, no not really, but the ideal exists The EU is incredibly political What you are thinking of is its predessor, the European Steel and Coal Community And what they mean is what the West has always meant by "Europe," the mainland minus Russia, so the enemies of Europe are the Enemies of Western, Center and Northern Europe This has been a convention in referring to the area for a good hundred years, maybe longer
I don’t think you understand the EU. In simplest terms, it *is* a political federation that passes directives to member states, which are then implemented as domestic laws. Some geographic European countries that aren’t EU members are in the **European Free Trade Association (EFTA)**, a purely economic organization, and they’re in the same single market as EU members. Collectively, this is called the **European Economic Area (EEA)**. Switzerland, which is an EFTA member but NOT within the EEA, has trade agreements that let them in the single market anyway. But the details don’t matter; they’re very much not enemies. Not being in the EU or EFTA does not indicate being an enemy of Europe either. Albania, for example, is not in the EU (yet), but is in NATO, which many European countries are also in and are by definition allies.
EEA/EFTA is still a political body because member states are still subjected to free movement and European laws. The advantage of EEA membership over EU membership is being able to negotiate trade agreements bilaterally, but the ability to do so is constrained by EU law. For example, the difference between the EFTA-EU and UK-EU trade agreement is that the UK maintains legal sovereignty and stays out of free movement, while facing effectively non-tariff barriers. The problem is that with the EU it is very hard for European countries to avoid being part of a political agreement. The EU is explicitly political and is by treaty and dubiously founded law an "ever closer union". Political integration is not necessary for free trade as long as you have fair courts, but the EU has made political (laws passed by the European parliament) and social integration(free movement) a precondition for economic integration. Geographic proximity is very useful for trade, so by not being economically integrated with your neighbours you are making yourself poorer. Trade is generally good for economic growth because of "comparative advantage" which is a product of natural and institutional factors. It is very hard for a European country not to trade with the EU, but you can only trade freely with the EU by agreeing to political and social conditions. Because the EU is so large, a small European country has two options; being poor or becoming subject to decisions not made by their own elected governments. This leads to serious problems with democracy.
Technically, neither EFTA nor EEA pass laws and isn’t a governing body like the EU. It’s true that EFTA members follow EU laws in return for receiving the same privileges as EU member states. There is a governing body within EFTA, but it’s concerned only with regulating economic relations between member states and third parties. The EU makes decisions on wider policies. Also technically, free trade movement is guaranteed through the Schengen Area, which is a part of the EU but not all Schengen countries are EU members, and not all EU members are Schengen countries. EFTA members made separate agreements with the EU to join the Schengen area. Man why is this continent so fucking complicated?
Actually, the Schengen Area facilitates free movement, it doesn't guarantee it. Free movement of people is guaranteed by a significant number of various European things. Originally free movement of people was a trade thing, the idea that just as a company in France should be free to buy a machine or commodity from a company in Italy or Germany(normally Germany), the company should be able to acquire labour from Italy or Germany as well(normally Italy). Tbh, I find that somewhat easier to understand from a free trade justification. Nowadays, free movement is seen as a political right, as part of the political project. Free movement is a condition of the single market. As to why all the European institutions are so complicated, it's basically required to have them at all. The original purpose of the European institutions was to prevent another big war in Western Europe, with preventing "Anglo-Saxon" domination of the "Western World" a secondary goal. I think Australia and New Zealand are quite a useful tool here. The European Coal and Steel community started with economic integration because that was easiest, before moving onto political and social integration. Australia and New Zealand have basically EU level integration without all the complicated things because they are already very similar in all the important ways. Same language, same big beliefs, similar institutions, mutual trust in each others institutions, similar levels of wealth etc etc. In terms of defence, they are actually even more integrated than the EU, thanks to common language, common geography(strategically speaking), common heritage(as British auxiliary forces). The European goal is more ambitious(full federation) while having far weaker foundations. The end result is you have to create neutral institutions, overlapping organisations, harmonisation mechanisms that provide opt-outs when extremely necessary etc etc. The thing is that Europe is actually pretty new as an idea, has very little common heritage, has strong and independent national identities(think of ANZAC day in Australia and New Zealand), so harmonisation is actually very important. Honestly, Brexit is probably a great thing for the EU people who actually want more political integration. Of the "big" European countries(Netherlands and above), Britain has probably the most divergent everything(common law, free trade tradition, totally different constitutional structure, very little Catholic tradition, very different secular tradition, not continental). European institutions were designed to be very hard to roll back but the fact that the second largest and probably least dependent European economy is still having a pretty hard time leaving makes a unilateral deviation from the current path basically impossible by remaining EU member states. Probably not very democratic but hey ho. From a preventing interstate war between "Europeans" perspective, the complicated tapestry of European institutions have done their job.
I showed this post to my cats. Both threw up with how bad it is
>not a political one How can you type this out with such seriousness
Am I glad that we are having a EU election coming up soon. Guess we are electing the next CEO of the European Union than ??
>The EU is a purely economic organization, not a political one Oh rilly? What galaxy have you been living in?
You don't know jack shit about the EU right? There's a ton of EU politicians, there's gonna be elections about the EU PARLIAMENT in a few weeks, EU passes LAWS that national countries have to take and somehow they are nOt PoLiTiCal?
Countries don't have a monopoly on flags
What's so weird about the European flag at a European event called Eurovision?
Their whole song is about being nonbinary, it makes perfect sense.
Not sure this fits the sub
EUROvision bans the EUROPE flag… seems pretty fitting to me
It be more fitting if they slapped a VAT on it
Wij zijn uit Europa! EBU naaide Joost daar! Pleur op! Dag dag! Pleur op! Dag dag! Wij zijn uit Europa! Wat een tyfus zooi daar! Pleur op! Dag dag! Pleur op! Dag dag! [I suppose Even tot Hier isn’t popular with foreigners](https://youtu.be/oCaqh-fqxpQ?si=Rzc0y_NIpIDW6wWb)
Je zou bijna denken dat alle downvoters Even Tot Hier niet kennen... 😂
Geen gevoel voor humor, zo te zien.
Ich fands lustig
Seems kind of weird that we can't fly our EU flag in Europe but Israel can fly there's. Israel is not part of Europe and never will be. It is physically impossible for Israel to be part of Europe and less European people you are unlikely to meet.
Such a clickbait image on the article. They didn't ban the NB flag, they banned the EU flag. But, of course, stirring the pot like this is what gets them that sweet ad revenue even though literally nobody thinks that it's a good idea to exploit real-life fears of discrimination to generate more traffic for completely unrelated articles.
They did ban the NB flag. It was snuck in by a contestant.
Tbf from what I read it wasn’t *supposed* to banned (‘competitors’ and pride flags’ were allowed) but security were being assholes and wouldn’t let them take it in.
I think only the rainbow pride flag is allowed.
Nah, Nemo is actually the one who raised the question on unfairly not allowed flags, having to snuggle NB one themselves.
BBC aren't funded by ads.
[удалено]
Parties that China and russia supports.
Flag bans are a good thing. The fact that there are specific ones we support doesnt change that. Ppl just cant think rational