"Appropriation" exists as a concept, but not as a problem.

>>67128282
You might be better asking this on /his/ or /lit/, no one actually puts forward coherent arguments here desu.

Arguments against cultural appropriation are moral ones and break down because of this fact.

>>67128282
imitation is the greatest form of flattery

cultural appropriation is just another cord on the cat of ninetails american style liberals want you to flay yourself with for no reason.

it also makes out that all of human history and interaction is wrong

>>67128960
>tool of self flagellation for its own sake
I think I agree with this but the amount of near-universal disdain for the practice of appropriation is what makes want to doublecheck that I'm not just dismissing it due to oversimplification or something. But it seems to rely on the idea that there is some "pure," wholly original way to come upon an idea, and that makes no goddamn sense at all

>>67128870
I appreciate the advice, if this dies I'll take up my question over there

>>67128282
The only argument for cultural appropriation being a bad thing is "muh feelings"
t. someone who has to listen to a professor complain about it

>>67128282
>I'm about as liberal as a leaf can come but I genuinely cannot understand the argument for appropriation being a problem.
Bless USA for inventing hockey and maple syrup!
USA #1! USA #1! USA #1!
Canada is the worst part of USA though.

File: usa.png (80KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 250x250px

>>67129413
dog bless ameriga

>>67129413
Appropriation as I have seen it argued against is not necessarly interchangeable with claiming credit for something. If, in fact, it is, then that is my error, and in that case alone I would understand how it could be a thing to be defended against.

However I see the term used for practises as simple as using musical instruments of different ethnicities in original compositions, or taking the staple dish of some culture and re-imagining it in some other form. Does that new thing not have the right to exist, and, if not, why?

Let's take for granted that maple syrup is Canadian (which, in reality, we cannot); Is any dish that an American invents using maple syrup appropriation? I can't see the argument in favour of that definition.

On top of that, if that example is just me misunderstanding or exaggerating the scope of the definition of appropriation, I'm unable to see the line where something becomes appropriation.

File: original polish kebab.jpg (174KB, 830x830px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 830x830px

>>67129721
>Appropriation as I have seen it argued against is not necessarly interchangeable with claiming credit for something.
Where have you seen it?

File: file.png (613KB, 693x864px) Image search: [Google]

613KB, 693x864px

>>67130132
where I've seen it used most (and most strongly decried) are instances like this (picture related, source http://civileats.com/2016/03/31/beyond-talk-the-search-for-real-solutions-in-the-conversation-about-food-and-cultural-appropriation/)

I've seen it come up when talking about fashion, the arts (music, film, etc), pretty much all manner of creative expression.

Most importantly, it's not in cases where someone is claiming to have created something that was actually made by someone else. It seems to come up frequently when someone puts their own twist on something that originated in a culture outside their own.

That seems like a perfectly acceptable act of creation, to my eye, and historically it is the source of at least half the cultural staples you can point to.

A lot of people think that all "appropriation" is is getting mad at little girls for having dreads because they are all stuck up busybodies.

The truth is, its really a reaction to a the elite pushing a dangerous idea.

Recently, there has been a trend, especially in acedemia, to push the idea that "race doesn't exist", "ethnicity is a social construct", "we are all one race, the human race". They think that by erasing peoples identity, they can bring about a world peace. That the idea of "races" is more trouble than its worth. They hate the idea of races, but they love the idea of "diversity". They want to pry apart "culture" from "race" and reduce peoples culture down to bits and bobbles so they can have their precious diversity. They love seeing mexicans with asian tattoos, or white girls with corn rows, or blacks wearing chopsticks in their hair because its diversity without the issue of race.

A lot of radical black nationalist, black seperatists, and other race oriented groups have caught onto this and are disgusted by having their torn away from them. These people aren't leftists. Lefties are usually the white girls with dreads and asian tattoos who identify as hindu because they are such worldly special snowflakes. They are the ones pushing the "race is a social construct" bullshit. Every day, the idea from the race oriented groups are seeping down and people are becoming more aware of their racial identity, while rejecting the leftists post-racial ideologies.

Maybe the people who get bothered over cooking sauces are taking it too far or misunderstanding the issue, but the erasure of racial identities is a real thing.

>>67131636
I'm tempted by your summary but aren't the people most sensitive to it, or the most ready to attempt to correct such behaviour, the same academics that you imply are purposely trying to erase those boundaries?

Personally, I love seeing "mexicans with asian tattoos, blacks with chopsticks in their hair, etc etc" because it's unusual and re-contextualising something is a big part of creating new and interesting things. Definitley not because I want asian culture to be assimilated and turned into an abstraction.

I don't see a black woman putting chopsticks in her hair as a threat to the existence/autonomy of asian culture, is that naive on my part?

File: 1475254075223.gif (374KB, 821x796px) Image search: [Google]

374KB, 821x796px

Just tell them that they're racists because xenophobes use the same "stay in your own little pools and don't mingle out into the greater forum" argument.

Then you get to watch their stupified faces working out the cognative dissonance to find a reason to bullshit themselves to believe they aren't wrong.

>>67131636
No, don't stick it to the "leftists". If you weren't born without an identity then you'd realise that the ones calling out "cultural appropriation" are liberal themselves.

>>67128282
AFAIK The only arguments that claim that cultural appropriation is bad is based on morality and some botched reasoning that cultures must be secluded
I usually don't talk about this topic so I can't say anything as an expert but there comes a point where it might become a problem, such as attempting to erase local cultures in favor of foreign ones (Vaguely Sweden/Germany though this is a stretch)
I could argue this is bad for a number of reasons but it rests mainly on the fact that there is little logic in attempting to erase or suppress local cultures in favor for temporary globalist cultural fads

You are correct. Cultural diffusion is one of the key drivers of human progress, and without "appropriation" of different cultures, humanity would be comparatively less developed, less rounded, and less fulfilled.

But in the circular firing squad of identity politics, the only thing that matters is that you are a victim and are thus aggrieved. And if human progress needs to take a hit so you can sit at the top of the totem pole, so be it.