Jump to content

Should Nina Kraviz have been booked for Arcadia?


blutarsky
 Share

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, KatFiles said:

I dont think its valid if it hurts people that arent part of the regime or arent supporting it of their own free will, which is another issue. If you lived there under the same conditions and that was the information you were fed, do you think its plausable that you would have a different view than them?

I find this binary Russia bad but us good narrative worse than simplistic and ultimately casuses more harm than good.

 

This also doesn't wholly apply to Nina who lives part of the time in Germany so isn't in some Russian bubble where she doesn't have access to other information. I also work with both Russians and Ukrainians. I know Russians who have fled to Armenia and who had to bribe people to be allowed to leave because their wife had been involved in the protests. Those Russians whenever I ask how they are always say they don't feel they have a right to complain because they know how their Ukrainian colleagues are suffering because of the actions their leader chose to take. It's not something that happened to Russia, it's something the leaders of Russia caused. 

It's okay not to be brave and speak out. I understand that would be a very difficult thing to do but in which case put your head down and accept that you will be subject to the same sanctions as the rest of the Russian people. 

For those who try to compare it to the Gulf War I would have had no problem with Iraq refusing to have British people perform at concerts there. I would have agreed with them and said it was absolutely fair enough. Any countries who were allied with Iraq who chose to take that stance as well I would completely have respected their right to do it also. Glastonbury would have been a little more problematic because they are also people who live in the country that had gone to war so they would have been cancelling themselves also. Nina is free to play as many Russian clubs and festivals as she wants. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, KatFiles said:

I dont think its valid if it hurts people that arent part of the regime or arent supporting it of their own free will, which is another issue. If you lived there under the same conditions and that was the information you were fed, do you think its plausable that you would have a different view than them?

I find this binary Russia bad but us good narrative worse than simplistic and ultimately casuses more harm than good.

 

I use South Africa as the yard stick, many of these arguments were the same made then and they've been shown to be wrong over time. There isn't a way to make a nation state alter its actions without affecting those who agree with you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, gigpusher said:

This also doesn't wholly apply to Nina who lives part of the time in Germany so isn't in some Russian bubble where she doesn't have access to other information. I also work with both Russians and Ukrainians. I know Russians who have fled to Armenia and who had to bribe people to be allowed to leave because their wife had been involved in the protests. Those Russians whenever I ask how they are always say they don't feel they have a right to complain because they know how their Ukrainian colleagues are suffering because of the actions their leader chose to take. It's not something that happened to Russia, it's something the leaders of Russia caused. 

It's okay not to be brave and speak out. I understand that would be a very difficult thing to do but in which case put your head down and accept that you will be subject to the same sanctions as the rest of the Russian people. 

For those who try to compare it to the Gulf War I would have had no problem with Iraq refusing to have British people perform at concerts there. I would have agreed with them and said it was absolutely fair enough. Any countries who were allied with Iraq who chose to take that stance as well I would completely have respected their right to do it also. Glastonbury would have been a little more problematic because they are also people who live in the country that had gone to war so they would have been cancelling themselves also. Nina is free to play as many Russian clubs and festivals as she wants. 

 

She has family who still live in Russia so it does apply. I agree that this is an issue of the regime as opposed to Russians who obviously are not in contol of who governs them. I dont agree however that people should simply accept sanctions for the sins of others. Thats like you being arrested for something that someone else did but because you are the same race or from the same country you should have to accept it. That sounds like prejudiced behaviour and its not acceptable. The issue about who gets to play on the bill isnt down to some construct of who represent a nation (who voted for them to have that role exactly?), its about a small number of people trying to pressure the ones who do make these choices and who have long standing relationships with an artist to turn there backs on them, based on a social media campaign. Its not likely to happen. The punters of techno events simply arent a political group in the main, they are unlikley to change their music preferences due to something they arent engaged in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Leyrulion said:

I use South Africa as the yard stick, many of these arguments were the same made then and they've been shown to be wrong over time. There isn't a way to make a nation state alter its actions without affecting those who agree with you. 

Cant compare SA to this situation, doesnt seem like a suitable model. Africa was colonised and I wouldnt treat everyone from SA as a bigot either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, KatFiles said:

 

I find this binary Russia bad but us good narrative worse than simplistic and ultimately casuses more harm than good.

 

I agree which is why I haven't ever said that. I said I would fully support Russians who are outspoken against Putin appearing at the festival. I appreciate that would take great courage but wars are times when great courage is needed. 

 

24 minutes ago, KatFiles said:

She has family who still live in Russia so it does apply. I agree that this is an issue of the regime as opposed to Russians who obviously are not in contol of who governs them. I dont agree however that people should simply accept sanctions for the sins of others. Thats like you being arrested for something that someone else did but because you are the same race or from the same country you should have to accept it. That sounds like prejudiced behaviour and its not acceptable. The issue about who gets to play on the bill isnt down to some construct of who represent a nation (who voted for them to have that role exactly?), its about a small number of people trying to pressure the ones who do make these choices and who have long standing relationships with an artist to turn there backs on them, based on a social media campaign. Its not likely to happen. The punters of techno events simply arent a political group in the main, they are unlikley to change their music preferences due to something they arent engaged in.

Sanctions are a method that governments use when they don't want to retaliate with the same violence that the aggressor has used but they do want the country and the people in that country to change what they are doing. They are intended to be tough because they are in this case a response to the death and destruction of another country caused by that country. They are intended to make ordinary people rise up and realise they do need to get involved to stop what is happening in other countries. If Boris Johnson chose to bomb and kill France or Ireland I'd frankly be grateful of sanctions rather than the alternative which is they start bombing and killing people who live in Britain. I'm with Skunk Anansie on this Everything is political and that includes music. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, KatFiles said:

Cant compare SA to this situation, doesnt seem like a suitable model. Africa was colonised and I wouldnt treat everyone from SA as a bigot either.

I work with Russians every day still. I don't treat any of them as bigots so this is an imaginary lie that you are telling yourself I just believe that during a war like this we should only be supporting brave Russians by giving them paychecks to come and play festivals. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, gigpusher said:

I agree which is why I haven't ever said that. I said I would fully support Russians who are outspoken against Putin appearing at the festival. I appreciate that would take great courage but wars are times when great courage is needed. 

 

Sanctions are a method that governments use when they don't want to retaliate with the same violence that the aggressor has used but they do want the country and the people in that country to change what they are doing. They are intended to be tough because they are in this case a response to the death and destruction of another country caused by that country. They are intended to make ordinary people rise up and realise they do need to get involved to stop what is happening in other countries. If Boris Johnson chose to bomb and kill France or Ireland I'd frankly be grateful of sanctions rather than the alternative which is they start bombing and killing people who live in Britain. I'm with Skunk Anansie on this Everything is political and that includes music. 

She isnt being sanctioned by the government, its a few people that are angry that she didnt used her instagram page to spout off their views regardless of the outcome. The obvious difference is a government is elected, the insta mob just are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, gigpusher said:

I work with Russians every day still. I don't treat any of them as bigots so this is an imaginary lie that you are telling yourself I just believe that during a war like this we should only be supporting brave Russians by giving them paychecks to come and play festivals. 

You work with Russias eh well whoop-de-doo.

Im sure these imaginary Russians are in agreement with you that they should be cancelled and not allowed to earn like NK, surely the fact you work with Russians just blows out your argument that they shouldnt be employed because of the war lol

You didnt think it through.....

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

1 minute ago, KatFiles said:

You work with Russias eh well whoop-de-doo.

Im sure these imaginary Russians are in agreement with you that they should be cancelled and not allowed to earn like NK, surely the fact you work with Russians just blows out your argument that they shouldnt be employed because of the war lol

You didnt think it through.....

 

The company they work for is dissolving all Russian operations by the middle of this month. The only ones who will be able to continue working for them are those who choose to leave Russia that is a big sacrifice for those people but many have already made the move to Armenia so it's proof of the impact of sanctions rather than not. It's why one of them had to bribe an official to leave. Those who refuse to leave Russia will be out of a job whether they support Putin or not. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rex2 said:

BYOB would have gone off though 

They would have had to!

 

1 hour ago, Florian Saucer Attack said:

The 02-19 bills to be more precise 

This is true.

 

But if we’re being consistent that’s what should have happened. None of the acts concerned started the Iraq War, none of the people attending shows by them started the Iraq War, in fact many of them supported the Government that did and will have voted for them again in 2005. Nina didn’t start the war in Ukraine, none of the people who want to watch her at Glastonbury started the war in Ukraine.

But if Glastonbury Festival is to be consistent then all those acts who don’t speak or against the war should be banned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, gigpusher said:

 

The company they work for is dissolving all Russian operations by the middle of this month. The only ones who will be able to continue working for them are those who choose to leave Russia that is a big sacrifice for those people but many have already made the move to Armenia so it's proof of the impact of sanctions rather than not. It's why one of them had to bribe an official to leave. Those who refuse to leave Russia will be out of a job whether they support Putin or not. 

Your position is that people should lose work because of a Government they didnt vote for which is never acceptable, yep its proof that sanctions are about as accurate as an atomic bomb, because we all know Putins cronies have already shifted their cash to safe havens, but you can feel good because a few working Russians will be out of work. Result.

Ok so you would want a DJ to stop the music and start shouting about the war in Russia? Or do you want them to add their vocals to a 3 deck mix they are currently in the middle of?
I can assure you that no DJ at Terminal V did this and I doubt it would have went down a treat with the crowd who are more intent on getting wasted and pulling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MEGABOWL said:

They would have had to!

 

This is true.

 

But if we’re being consistent that’s what should have happened. None of the acts concerned started the Iraq War, none of the people attending shows by them started the Iraq War, in fact many of them supported the Government that did and will have voted for them again in 2005. Nina didn’t start the war in Ukraine, none of the people who want to watch her at Glastonbury started the war in Ukraine.

But if Glastonbury Festival is to be consistent then all those acts who don’t speak or against the war should be banned.

I've already mentioned this. If you are going to take that viewpoint Glastonbury should have cancelled itself because it was also British. The appropriate response is for Iraq and its allies to cancel British artists which I would have agreed with. That would be an appropriate response to that war. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Leyrulion said:

MLK summed it up quite well

"The ultimate tragedy is not the oppression and cruelty by the bad people but the silence over that by the good people." "There comes a time when silence is betrayal".

 

Nice words in an attempt to rouse the rabble but let’s be honest the real tragedy is the oppression. Not a lack of dissent from people who may be at genuine existential risk for dissenting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, gigpusher said:

I've already mentioned this. If you are going to take that viewpoint Glastonbury should have cancelled itself because it was also British. The appropriate response is for Iraq and its allies to cancel British artists which I would have agreed with. That would be an appropriate response to that war. 

I don’t agree. If you’re going to cancel an act from a Country that is waging an aggressive war because they didn’t speak out against that war you have to do the same for all acts that are from Countries that are waging an aggressive war. Consistency is vital, you can’t pick and choose your wars. You’re either taking that particular stand or you’re not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, MEGABOWL said:

I don’t agree. If you’re going to cancel an act from a Country that is waging an aggressive war because they didn’t speak out against that war you have to do the same for all acts that are from Countries that are waging an aggressive war. Consistency is vital, you can’t pick and choose your wars. You’re either taking that particular stand or you’re not.

So Glastonbury should have banned all British acts and gone ahead with the festival themselves. Surely even you can see that if Glastonbury were to choose to be that consistent they would have no choice but to ban themselves for also being British. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, KatFiles said:

I can assure you that no DJ at Terminal V did this and I doubt it would have went down a treat with the crowd who are more intent on getting wasted and pulling.

At one of the most mainstream business techno events in the world. 

Anyway, it's good to hear different viewpoints. 

Mine is that Nina K has no place at an event that has a line up poster with a blue and yellow border. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, gigpusher said:

So Glastonbury should have banned all British acts and gone ahead with the festival themselves. Surely even you can see that if Glastonbury were to choose to be that consistent they would have no choice but to ban themselves for also being British. 

If that’s the logical conclusion then yes. If you’re taking a moral and principled stand you have to be consistent, if you use circumstances to justify sometimes taking a moral and principled stand but at other times not bothering then it’s not really a moral and principled stand. It’s devalued.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, KatFiles said:

That was always at the heart of rave culture, the whole eff politics lets dance approach. These are the ones who insist on pronouns and want to charge non-non-binary people more to attend a party. The problem is nobody want to attend their parties, simply because most punters have no interest in these fringe politics.

Hey @KatFiles on the subject of pronouns (wtf??) - can you make up your mind which one you should use - you have used 1st person plural to imply you’re Russian and to imply you’re not Russian. You joined today to only post on this topic, so I just thought for transparency you should let us know 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, KatFiles said:

That was always at the heart of rave culture, the whole eff politics lets dance approach. These are the ones who insist on pronouns and want to charge non-non-binary people more to attend a party. The problem is nobody want to attend their parties, simply because most punters have no interest in these fringe politics.

Hey @KatFiles on the subject of pronouns (wtf??) - can you make up your mind which one you should use - you have used 1st person plural to imply you’re Russian and to imply you’re not Russian. You joined today to only post on this topic, so I just thought for transparency you should let us know 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, MEGABOWL said:

Nice words in an attempt to rouse the rabble but let’s be honest the real tragedy is the oppression. Not a lack of dissent from people who may be at genuine existential risk for dissenting.

The oppression is happening because of the silence imo. Simple fact is they're prioritising their own risk over others, we may all very well make the same decision in similar circumstances doesn't change that fact. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, KatFiles said:

Cant compare SA to this situation, doesnt seem like a suitable model. Africa was colonised and I wouldnt treat everyone from SA as a bigot either.

I mean... What do you think they're trying to do there...🤣 Might not be the word used recently but it's essential what's happening. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, following my suggestion above to flood Arcadia with Ukraine flags -  I’ve just ordered 25 5ft by 3ft Ukraine flags. £99.75. Obviously some people might only want/afford to buy one. Someone else has got in touch with me prepared to do the same. I’m not sure what the best way to go forward is, but if anyone else is interested then maybe respond on DM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/29/2022 at 10:46 AM, TheDayman said:

As mentioned in my original post, the general consensus is that there is no evidence to state that she is Pro-War. Plenty here stating they haven't seen much to make a judgement (as I did also) so here's the original video that began my change in thinking -

This is a segment from the film on Mikhail Khodorkoysky an exiled Russian businessman / Oligarch , who fell foul of Vladimir Putin. Have a read, particularly the section on his relationship with Putin:

 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikhail_Khodorkovsky

When Nina was addressed on this a few years later in an interview, she effectively confirmed that her opinion has not changed and rather she now just keeps it to herself rather than argue with the more liberal minded. Full text attached below.

Now fast forward to more recently, we have videos of her performing at private parties for Russian Oligarchs as well as fellow DJs making pretty strong claims, the most pointed of which coming from Ukrainian DJ Nadia who claims that in a conversation with her in 2014 regarding the annexation of Crimea, she states that Putin was "the smartest man".

This is the context that changed my position on her. I went from "I'm not just going to believe a few social media comments" to "actually, there are direct quotes and comments from Nina that substantiate the claims against her". 

I'm not going to go as far as saying she is Pro-War (even the phrase is silly, is anyone really Pro-War?) but I do believe she is Pro-Russian state, was Pro-Putin at least up until very recently and may very well be someone who considers the invasion of Ukraine a "special military operation" rather than the outright war that is.

These are the reasons I believe her addition to the lineup is in poor taste and personally think she'll be removed from the lineup before the festival.

 

20220429_102136.jpg

20220429_102130.jpg

@FloorFiller Here's the context I found a few months back...

TL:DR - she's on record as being pro-Russian state and pro-Putin in the past (specifically around a Russian Oliyarch that fell foul of Putin & in the comments Nadia claims she made to her regarding the annexation of Crimea in 2014).

Maybe she's changed her view's since but unfortunately there's nothing to indicate she has.She's also on record as stating that she now keeps her political comments to herself as a result of the blacklash she has recieved.

Personally, I still think it's a bad look to have her booked which has been made all the worse by the backdrop of other festivals that have dropped her in the meantime.

As the saying goes, there's no smoke without fire so I'm applying occam's razor on this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, TheDayman said:


TL:DR - she's on record as being pro-Russian state and pro-Putin in the past (specifically around a Russian Oliyarch that fell foul of Putin & in the comments Nadia claims she made to her regarding the annexation of Crimea in 2014).

You are being misleading here. She was in favour of an oligarch being imprisoned for corruption. Putin pardoned him and up until the start of the Ukraine war he was living the highlife in Switzerland and England  

The Nadia claims are hearsay 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...