The Attribution Effect, or How Zhapykeev Confused His Personal Blog with the History of the Country

Наталья Маркова Society
VK X OK WhatsApp Telegram
The recent podcast of Ernist Kyazov with Syimyk Japikeev once again raised an important question about a phenomenon that becomes relevant for Kyrgyzstan after every significant political change. This concerns the desire of some public figures to appropriate a role in history that they did not actually play.

Here, we are not talking about the right to interpret history, which is normal, but about deliberate manipulation of facts. History should record objective reality, not be a product of imagination.

Personality or Comedy Genre?


Syimyk Japikeev has undoubtedly become a prominent figure in the protests against the regime of Sooronbay Jeenbekov. Since May 2020, his "kitchen" on YouTube has attracted the attention of the entire country, where he shared his views on what was happening in Kyrgyzstan in simple language. His approach and content fully matched the demands of the audience at that time.
But did he really become a catalyst for the events of October 2020?
Most likely, the answer is no. The change of power in October 2020 was a consequence of a deep structural crisis, not the actions of one popular blogger. The reasons for this crisis were known and had accumulated long before Japikeev's "kitchen" appeared. Although he became a mouthpiece for protest sentiments, a mouthpiece is not equal to an ideologue, and popularity does not always indicate real power.

The history of mass protests, including in Kyrgyzstan, shows that such events never have a single author, and their triggers are combinations of various factors, not streams from "kitchens".

Japikeev's assertion in the podcast about his significance in these events can be seen as part of his comedic style, in which he is indeed strong, but this is not a serious analysis of all the factors that led to Jeenbekov's resignation.

By the way, when it became clear that the results of the parliamentary elections on October 6, 2020, were falsified, the "Chon Kazat" party, of which Japikeev was a leader, was unable to organize protests. Only after protests began to emerge from other parties, such as "Mekenchil," "Ata-Meken," "Bir-Bol," and "Respublika," did the people take to the streets and overthrow the regime.

Sadyr Japarov: Myths and Reality


Another myth that Japikeev tried to convey is that no one demanded the release of Sadyr Japarov in October. However, the crowd in Ala-Too Square, chanting "Sadyr, Sadyr!", clearly testified otherwise to anyone following the events.

In fact, Sadyr Japarov was a well-known politician long before 2020, and demands for his release were regularly voiced. While in prison, he actively worked on social media and managed to create significant support that transitioned offline at a critical moment.

One politician, who actively participated in the protests and was not connected to Japarov, recounted that wherever he met with the people, the first question was: "When will you free Sadyr?" He was astonished at how Japarov, while in prison, managed to gain such support.

"I was used and thrown away"


Another common narrative — "I was used and thrown away" — is also present in the podcast with Japikeev. History knows many such examples where protest activists do not find their place in peaceful life.

However, in Japikeev's case, it is important to clarify that he did indeed receive several positions. But expectations did not match reality. Politics is not just a continuation of blogging; it is complex institutional work that requires responsibility and the ability to act within the system. The inability to adapt to this system is not always a conspiracy; sometimes it is simply a mismatch between role and competencies.

Everyone who is even slightly familiar with Japikeev has no doubts about the reasons for his absence from the political arena.

This podcast could have gone unmentioned if Japikeev's story were merely personal and not typical. Given that the country is once again entering an election cycle, such stories will appear more frequently.

This is dangerous not because of the exaggeration of roles, but because society begins to believe in simplified explanations of complex processes.

Syimyk Japikeev was undoubtedly part of these events, but not their architect. He was given an opportunity but could not realize it as he expected. This is an ordinary human story, but turning it into an alternative textbook on the modern history of Kyrgyzstan is abnormal.
VK X OK WhatsApp Telegram

Read also: