UN considering making "Cultural Appropriation" illegal

[Kramania]

The easiest solution is just to not legislate it.

Let's just agree that fake "ethnic" or "exotic" fashion sucks and that fashion designers who do that are stupid dicks, and call it a day.

Who actually wears ethnic fashion anymore? Jeans and a t-shirt work for me.

[SD_Film Artists]

Personally, I'd struggle to think of anything more white nationalist than the term "myth of the noble savage", but hey ho, I'm not the one who thinks that a people has no right to what they've created.

I mean, similar protections essentially already exist: Parma Ham can only come from Parma. Champagne can only come from Champagne.
Mowbray pies can only come from Melton Mowbray and Stilton may only be produced in an area of Derbyshire, Leicestershire and Nottinghamshire (ironically it was first sold in Stilton, Cambridge, but not produced there, hence the disparity).

If you will view my posting history, I've raged against that sort of thing too. I think it's garbage that somebody can own a label like that specific to a region.

At least the 'Parma Ham', 'Champagne Champagne' examples can be clearly defined by the geographical boarder; whereas "culture" is a much more fluid and nuanced concept to catagorise in law. And as if that's not complicated enough, they also want to attach it to race which is in itself a largely social construct.

[Imperializt Russia]

I'm not saying that you inherently support those or whatever I'm saying it's no great stretch.

The problem is that these products have specific prestige because of, in those specific cases, centuries-old traditions.
The issue is shitbag companies profiteering off making shitty copies. Essentially, misleading consumers. After all, in those cases, it's not even a ban - companies can make "parma" ham, and sell "champagne" or "stilton" cheese or pork pies.
They just can't give them names that could be used to mislead a consumer to purchase it over the premium, original, traditional type - and in the process, siphoning money away from the property holder.

Yeah, it's an imperfect system. But that's capitalism being capitalism for you.

The issue is who cares? You can assign names like we do in the states based on composition of final product. If you want to engage in cultural isolationism ala white nationalism that's on you.

If we live in a capitalist culture where a person who makes a desirable product is apparently deserving of sales, repute and profit, then he should be protected from vulture shitbags who seek to mislead consumers by knowingly selling imitation or outright dissimilar products under the same name to pass them off as prestige goods.
Do you approve of counterfeiting products?

This is not only in the interest of the producer, but also the consumer, who should have the freedom to not be misled and make a meaningful choice.
"The freer the market the freer the people" seems only interested in the freedom of people to sell, and the people who have to actually buy their shite don't matter evidently judging by people who push for a totally unregulated market.

[Liriena]

Let's just agree that fake "ethnic" or "exotic" fashion sucks and that fashion designers who do that are stupid dicks, and call it a day.

Who actually wears ethnic fashion anymore? Jeans and a t-shirt work for me.

Hipsters and fake hippies, as far as I can tell.

[The East Marches II]

The issue is who cares? You can assign names like we do in the states based on composition of final product. If you want to engage in cultural isolationism ala white nationalism that's on you.

If we live in a capitalist culture where a person who makes a desirable product is apparently deserving of sales, repute and profit, then he should be protected from vulture shitbags who seek to mislead consumers by knowingly selling imitation or outright dissimilar products under the same name to pass them off as prestige goods.
Do you approve of counterfeiting products?

This is not only in the interest of the producer, but also the consumer, who should have the freedom to not be misled and make a meaningful choice.
"The freer the market the freer the people" seems only interested in the freedom of people to sell, and the people who have to actually buy their shite don't matter evidently judging by people who push for a totally unregulated market.

So we should make culture property? This is really some ancap stuff you are going into. Tell us more about this, will white people own the rights to tacky polos and khakis?

[Imperializt Russia]

If you will view my posting history, I've raged against that sort of thing too. I think it's garbage that somebody can own a label like that specific to a region.

At least the 'Parma Ham', 'Champagne Champagne' examples can be clearly defined by the geographical boarder; whereas "culture" is a much more fluid and nuanced concept to catagorise in law. And as if that's not complicated enough, they also want to attach it to race which is in itself a largely social construct unless you have "pure" DNA going back 5+ generations.

This is completely false.

You are greatly overstating any connection between culture and race.
A person who grows up in suburban America and finds out they're 1/64th Cherokee aren't "not Cherokee" because it's only 1/64th, it's because they're hilariously far removed from Cherokee culture and the Cherokee nation and don't participate in the actual culture.
Of course, if they move to the Cherokee Nation, then despite being 63/64ths "white", then they're Cherokee, it's not a racial boundary.

For extremely complex ethnic and socioeconomic reasons, there are strong correlations between ethnicity and (native) culture.

For a simple abstract, I'm white af and live in a part of my country that could arguably be termed "ethnically Christian" if you believed in that sort of thing. There's no rational reason to take part in "Islamic culture" because I'm not a Muslim. If I become a Muslim and make a genuine effort to participate, then I'm obviously participating in "Islamic culture".

It's just not ethnic.

[The East Marches II]

What does it matter? It's not their to own nor is it theirs alone. Blackfoot dispute with other tribes all the time over stolen ceremonial stuff, should each tribe all sue each other?

Yeah, that's my main problem with actually making a policy out of this debate: most cultures owe an awful lot of their elements to centuries of cultural interactions (both peaceful and violent). Very few cultures are so isolated that I would dare say their customs and traditions are theirs and theirs alone beyond any doubt. I mean, I'm a gosh darn Argie. My life is a cacophony of a thousand traditions from a thousand cultures mixing and splitting and doing all manner of strange stuff (I suspect it won't be long before somebody here comes up with barbecued beef sushi or something like that). If we start policing which traditions belong exclusively to which culture, it's going to get messy.

Thats why I can't support this sort of thing. The same thing goes being an American.

[Imperializt Russia]

If we live in a capitalist culture where a person who makes a desirable product is apparently deserving of sales, repute and profit, then he should be protected from vulture shitbags who seek to mislead consumers by knowingly selling imitation or outright dissimilar products under the same name to pass them off as prestige goods.
Do you approve of counterfeiting products?

This is not only in the interest of the producer, but also the consumer, who should have the freedom to not be misled and make a meaningful choice.
"The freer the market the freer the people" seems only interested in the freedom of people to sell, and the people who have to actually buy their shite don't matter evidently judging by people who push for a totally unregulated market.

So we should make culture property? This is really some ancap stuff you are going into. Tell us more about this, will white people own the rights to tacky polos and khakis?

It's hardly ancap, since anarcho-capitalists fail to realise the basic flaws of their worldview, namely bodies with the power, authority and will to protect their claims of property.

Indeed, this is anti-commercialism and regulation on market, which is pretty antithetical to ancaps.

[The East Marches II]

So we should make culture property? This is really some ancap stuff you are going into. Tell us more about this, will white people own the rights to tacky polos and khakis?

It's hardly ancap, since anarcho-capitalists fail to realise the basic flaws of their worldview, namely bodies with the power, authority and will to protect their claims of property.

Indeed, this is anti-commercialism and regulation on market, which is pretty antithetical to ancaps.

Thats not the case, you seem not to have read Hoppe. If the country is my private property and I hire people to enforce my property claims, then I am using the free market to prevent IP theft. :^)

This is ancapism 101, literal turning of culture into things that can be sued for in court. 10/10 well done "socialist"

[SD_Film Artists]

At least the 'Parma Ham', 'Champagne Champagne' examples can be clearly defined by the geographical boarder; whereas "culture" is a much more fluid and nuanced concept to catagorise in law. And as if that's not complicated enough, they also want to attach it to race which is in itself a largely social construct unless you have "pure" DNA going back 5+ generations.

This is completely false.

You are greatly overstating any connection between culture and race.
A person who grows up in suburban America and finds out they're 1/64th Cherokee aren't "not Cherokee" because it's only 1/64th, it's because they're hilariously far removed from Cherokee culture and the Cherokee nation and don't participate in the actual culture.
Of course, if they move to the Cherokee Nation, then despite being 63/64ths "white", then they're Cherokee, it's not a racial boundary.

For extremely complex ethnic and socioeconomic reasons, there are strong correlations between ethnicity and (native) culture.

For a simple abstract, I'm white af and live in a part of my country that could arguably be termed "ethnically Christian" if you believed in that sort of thing. There's no rational reason to take part in "Islamic culture" because I'm not a Muslim. If I become a Muslim and make a genuine effort to participate, then I'm obviously participating in "Islamic culture".

It's just not ethnic.

Who says that a Cherokee can't live in suburban America? Maybe their suburban house is next to lots of Cherokee mates who, worries about self-ghettoisation aside, may be forming a cool new off-shoot of what it means to be Cherokee. You see, culture isn't just a one-dimensional thing that you can put a fence around.

[Kantria]

It's the same sort of stuff that always happens. It's why I rarely mention my own background. The noble savage meme needs to die as does the idea some cultures are so fragile that it will be shattered or somebody wounded emotionally by its use in a fashion show. It's no more exploitation than Natives favoring pickup trucks for work.

While I agree with you, as for it being no different from favoring pickup trucks, that's a terrible comparison. At some point, the pickup manufacturer was paid for the truck and its designers were apportioned their just* compensation.

I think this issue is more complex than "SJWs" and "anti-SJWs" would claim it is, but there is a very simple question at its core: should indigenous groups be allowed to control traditional symbols of their culture as if they were collectively-owned intellectual property? If your answer is 'no', then why not? No one living may have created the property, but the people profiting off of it did even less. If your answer is 'yes', then where do you draw the line? At anything that predates copyright law as we know it? And do they get to control their intellectual property in perpetuity, or does it eventually enter the public domain? If it does, why aren't we treating it as if it is in the public domain *already*?

I don't believe this issue is one that should just be derided and dismissed out of hand, even though I also don't necessarily believe that legislation is required.

Reading this thread prompted me to do a quick search on "cultural appropriation". The Wikipedia article led me to this Atlantic article (which takes the form of a series of e-mails exchanged between the writer and a researcher at the Cato Institute), which I appreciated for its calm and reasonable approach to the issue, although the notion of indigenous intellectual property was not discussed:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ar ... on/521634/

*According to the market. The actual "justness" of your compensation may vary.

[Imperializt Russia]

It's hardly ancap, since anarcho-capitalists fail to realise the basic flaws of their worldview, namely bodies with the power, authority and will to protect their claims of property.

Indeed, this is anti-commercialism and regulation on market, which is pretty antithetical to ancaps.

Thats not the case, you seem not to have read Hoppe. If the country is my private property and I hire people to enforce my property claims, then I am using the free market to prevent IP theft. :^)

This is ancapism 101, literal turning of culture into things that can be sued for in court. 10/10 well done "socialist"

Well, in socialist and anarchist circles, "anarcho"-capitalism is considered so flawed that the elite minority economic interests it would supposedly serve don't even support it - but it makes a good distraction, and also a general chipping away at the aspects of the state they don't like (note - doesn't include the whole "arm of the state that literally exists to protect property that either no longer exists, or can no longer be depended on, without the state").

And for the billionth time, yes, this is a flawed solution, but it's applied to a flawed system. Of course it's flawed.
Remove capitalism, remove commercialisation, remove the need for IP.

[The East Marches II]

Thats not the case, you seem not to have read Hoppe. If the country is my private property and I hire people to enforce my property claims, then I am using the free market to prevent IP theft. :^)

This is ancapism 101, literal turning of culture into things that can be sued for in court. 10/10 well done "socialist"

Well, in socialist and anarchist circles, "anarcho"-capitalism is considered so flawed that the elite minority economic interests it would supposedly serve don't even support it - but it makes a good distraction, and also a general chipping away at the aspects of the state they don't like (note - doesn't include the whole "arm of the state that literally exists to protect property that either no longer exists, or can no longer be depended on, without the state").

And for the billionth time, yes, this is a flawed solution, but it's applied to a flawed system. Of course it's flawed.
Remove capitalism, remove commercialisation, remove the need for IP.

Thats a garbage answer and you know it. "We need to make culture property because we live in a Capitalist system". Thats so lame and a cop out.

[SD_Film Artists]

Remove capitalism, remove commercialisation, remove the need for IP.

But then you'll still have Cultural Appropriation, the only difference is that the person who created the native American headdress (whether he is native American or not) will 'own the means of production' or whatever policy your socialist government has adopted.

[Imperializt Russia]

Well, in socialist and anarchist circles, "anarcho"-capitalism is considered so flawed that the elite minority economic interests it would supposedly serve don't even support it - but it makes a good distraction, and also a general chipping away at the aspects of the state they don't like (note - doesn't include the whole "arm of the state that literally exists to protect property that either no longer exists, or can no longer be depended on, without the state").

And for the billionth time, yes, this is a flawed solution, but it's applied to a flawed system. Of course it's flawed.
Remove capitalism, remove commercialisation, remove the need for IP.

Thats a garbage answer and you know it. "We need to make culture property because we live in a Capitalist system". Thats so lame and a cop out.

"I need to go to work because I live in a Capitalist system or I will starve and die in the cold"
Wow, so lame and a cop out.

[The East Marches II]

Thats a garbage answer and you know it. "We need to make culture property because we live in a Capitalist system". Thats so lame and a cop out.

"I need to go to work because I live in a Capitalist system or I will starve and die in the cold"
Wow, so lame and a cop out.

Cultural appropriation would exist outside of capitalism anyway. Thats the point. This is a textbook case of how white guilt goes so far to be white nationalist in thought. Well done.

[Imperializt Russia]

Remove capitalism, remove commercialisation, remove the need for IP.

But then you'll still have Cultural Appropriation, the only difference is that the person who created the native American headdress (whether he is native American or not) will 'own the means of production' or whatever policy your socialist government has adopted.

Which is a significant redress of present issues, they have unquestionable recognition over their culture's works. Though without commercialisation, would there be a demand for products resembling them anyway?

Were it not for the commercialisation of marginalised cultures, might we have ever had a societal debate on "cultural appropriation"? Possibly not. Just people a little upset at the demeaning of aspects of their culture.

[Imperializt Russia]

"I need to go to work because I live in a Capitalist system or I will starve and die in the cold"
Wow, so lame and a cop out.

Cultural appropriation would exist outside of capitalism anyway. Thats the point. This is a textbook case of how white guilt goes so far to be white nationalist in thought. Well done.

If feminism succeeds in eliminating rape culture, there will still be rape.

Yeah???
It's no longer implicitly condoned, which will hopefully contribute to a reduction.

It's obviously not a direct comparison, but come on.

[The East Marches II]

Cultural appropriation would exist outside of capitalism anyway. Thats the point. This is a textbook case of how white guilt goes so far to be white nationalist in thought. Well done.

If feminism succeeds in eliminating rape culture, there will still be rape.

Yeah???
It's no longer implicitly condoned, which will hopefully contribute to a reduction.

It's obviously not a direct comparison, but come on.

You unironically believe in rape culture don't you?

[Kramania]

But then you'll still have Cultural Appropriation, the only difference is that the person who created the native American headdress (whether he is native American or not) will 'own the means of production' or whatever policy your socialist government has adopted.

Which is a significant redress of present issues, they have unquestionable recognition over their culture's works. Though without commercialisation, would there be a demand for products resembling them anyway?

Were it not for the commercialisation of marginalised cultures, might we have ever had a societal debate on "cultural appropriation"? Possibly not. Just people a little upset at the demeaning of aspects of their culture.

"Just sprinkle some socialism on it and it will solve all the problems."

You really sound like a cliched socialist.

[Imperializt Russia]

If feminism succeeds in eliminating rape culture, there will still be rape.

Yeah???
It's no longer implicitly condoned, which will hopefully contribute to a reduction.

It's obviously not a direct comparison, but come on.

You unironically believe in rape culture don't you?

"unironically" fucking lol

[The East Marches II]

You unironically believe in rape culture don't you?

"unironically" fucking lol

Listen m8, if you want to relieve yourself of your guilt, just open up your wallet and give me the money to make yourself feel better and call it a day. No need to go dance around the matter.

[Imperializt Russia]

Which is a significant redress of present issues, they have unquestionable recognition over their culture's works. Though without commercialisation, would there be a demand for products resembling them anyway?

Were it not for the commercialisation of marginalised cultures, might we have ever had a societal debate on "cultural appropriation"? Possibly not. Just people a little upset at the demeaning of aspects of their culture.

"Just sprinkle some socialism on it and it will solve all the problems."

You really sound like a cliched socialist.

When the problem is commercialisation, the solution is abandoning systems that support or encourage commercialisation.

I mean, the other choice is feudalism and, well, nah.

[Imperializt Russia]

"unironically" fucking lol

Listen m8, if you want to relieve yourself of your guilt, just open up your wallet and give me the money to make yourself feel better and call it a day. No need to go dance around the matter.

I'm just laughing at the complete erasure of the meaning of "irony" by edgy nihilists on the internet, don't mind me.

[The East Marches II]

Listen m8, if you want to relieve yourself of your guilt, just open up your wallet and give me the money to make yourself feel better and call it a day. No need to go dance around the matter.

I'm just laughing at the complete erasure of the meaning of "irony" by edgy nihilists on the internet, don't mind me.

"Don't mind my dodge"

I'll let you slide just don't forget to pay me or you'll never purge your original sin!