The indiscriminate killings carried out by Israel in Gaza and their devastating consequences are profoundly altering the dynamics between art, politics, and the market. What used to be optional ground, choosing to take a stand or not, is now almost a moral obligation. The culture, and especially musicians, are at the center of a symbolic battle in which silence is no longer an option.
The case of rapper Kase.O and that of the singer Rosalía show two faces of how the Spanish cultural left is dealing with a conflict that goes beyond politics and reaches ethics, economics, and the personal.
KASE.O Y SU POLÉMICA POSTURA
Javier Ibarra, better known as Kase.O, has opted not to cancel his participation in several festivals run by Superstruct, a promoter controlled by the investment fund KKR, accused of links to pro-Israel interests.
Despite growing calls for a boycott by artists, activists, and part of the public, the rapper chose to perform. After being hammered on social media, the rapper expressed his pain over the massacres in Gaza, promised to donate a substantial portion of his earnings to pro-Palestinian causes and, in his greatest mistake, stated that he did not believe that not performing “would save any lives.”
Far from silencing the criticisms, his stance has sparked controversy after decades lamenting that “this” (wars) “does not stop.” While some value his pragmatism, others consider that continuing to participate in events funded by funds tied to Israel weakens his message.
ROSALÍA SE POSICIONA A EMPUJONES
For her part, Rosalía has become entangled in the controversy without seeking it directly. Designer Miguel Adrover, a reference in activism through fashion, refused to work with her because of her “silence” in the face of the Gaza massacre.
Under pressure, Rosalía released a statement in which she lamented the violence and condemned the deaths of innocents. However, she avoided an explicit mention of Israel or terms such as “genocide,” which is striking, or “apartheid,” which was interpreted by many as an attempt to straddle two waters.
She stated that she does not use her social networks as a political diary, and called for not “calling out” horizontally among artists, but aiming at “those who decide and have the power to act.” Although her statement was met with relief by some followers, the overall tone was one of disappointment.
She was accused of a lack of decisiveness and of adopting a lukewarm stance that, instead of calming waters, exposed the growing demand for a clear stance in times of humanitarian crisis.
LA IZQUIERDA CULTURAL SE VE OBLIGADA A MOJARSE
Rosalía’s case is paradigmatic of a broader transformation: the end of the neutral artist. In an era marked by visible conflicts and real-time global narratives, the public figures, especially those who have built a cutting-edge or socially engaged image, are expected to take a clear stance.
Not doing so is no longer seen as prudence, but as complicity. For decades, the mainstream allowed many artists to stay out of politics. But today, with a more informed and demanding audience, commitment has become almost a condition for cultural legitimacy again.
¿NEUTRALIDAD TRAS MÁS DE 60.000 ASESINATOS?
For some voices, after 60,000 killings carried out by Israel, not speaking out is not synonymous with neutrality: it is a position in itself, often understood as tacit support for this savage slaughter.
The case of the festivals bought by KKR has exposed an uncomfortable reality: a large portion of the cultural offerings are increasingly in the hands of large investment funds with geopolitical interests as questionable as Israel.
