It is interesting to examine to what extent the progressive, SJW idea of “cultural appropriation” is unique and in how it fits in with their overall narrative.

As an example of the concept, we have an ideology factory warning its students against Halloween, to the point of banning “acts of intolerance”. Incidentally, memorize this term. Watch for localities like Sodom-on-Sea to pass legislation using it. Those college students don’t just fade away, you know. They carry their ideology with them.

At any rate, this like many ideology factories banned all “conduct that serves no scholarly purpose appropriate to the educational experience and demonstrates bias against others”, which would seem to argue against Diversity, which serves no scholarly purpose. But let that pass for a moment.

“Cultural appropriation” was forsworn in the document. Then there follows a long list of forbidden speech—followed by the mandatory Orwellian boilerplate “Students are guaranteed freedom of inquiry and expression.”

What cultural appropriation is, is never defined. We first need to figure that out.

We know immediately what it cannot be. It can’t be foreign students and students-of-color appropriating Western, i.e. persons-of-no-color, culture.

That is, those outside the people-of-no-color-sphere are welcomed and encouraged to use all aspects of that culture, such as universities, electricity, computers, automobiles, planes, medicine and such like marvels. Hamburgers, pizzas, french fries and coke are on the menu. Jeans, golf caps, and tennis shoes and even suits are worn. Music, for good or for ill, is listened to, as is radio; movies are watched. Sprechen sie Englisch?

Come One, Come All: Appropriate Us! is the motto.

Since this type of appropriation is never complained about by SJWs, it must be that they see people-of-no-color culture as universal, even to the extent that they would mandate its imposition. This is true for parts of people-of-no-color culture, which is foisted on others whether they want it or not. Such as they do with democracy and LGBTQWERTY “rights”. They also declare things like internet access a “human right”. You know the list.

All everywhere are also said to be welcome to come at any time for any reason to live and be cared for in any people-of-no-color land, lands which are said not to be of people-of-no-color, but lands for all. Indeed, it is “racist” to suggest there is any such thing as people-of-no-color lands. Whereas most of the dry earth is openly acknowledged to naturally belong to people-of-color, as their land. Zimbabwe, Israel, Chile, Japan, et cetera, et cetera.

Opposite this, elements from other cultures are increasingly forbidden to people-of-no-color. Yoga classes are out—proving that SJW ideology is not all bad. Clothing of various sorts are verboten. Remember that female of-no-color who wore a Chinese dress and was made to suffer for it?

Some foods can’t be served to people-of-no-color. Taco Bell hasn’t made the hate list yet, but we do learn that “popularizing ‘ethnic’ food can be one way to harm a group of people while taking from their traditions.” How serving, say, sushi takes from a culture rather than celebrates it is an argument only an SJW can understand. Should the Japanese forgo curry?

The theory for the one-way condemnation of appropriation is the same as it is for one-way accusations of racism. Only people-of-no-color can be racists because they, and only they, have some mysterious power, either now or at some time in the past. Only people-of-no-color can appropriate because of this same power. Which even if they don’t have this power now, somehow its residue lingers and taints people-of-no-color at a genetic level.

There is only one way to eradicate the stain of this power. Justin Trudeau can appear in black face and in more different costumes than a Bulgarian circus clown. But he is a man of the left, strong on abortion and sodomy, so he is indulged—and even re-elected! Only a constant race to the left holds of-no-colorness at bay. Stop for a moment athwart history, and one instantly becomes a x-ist and x-ophobe.

Naturally, the idea of cultural appropriation, like racism, causes separation in tribes to become more routine, rigorous and institutional. Only Mexicans can wear sombreros, only Moroccan’s can don the fez, only “native” people can drape their skulls with feathers—or with the scalps of people-of-no-color, if they can still manage to cut them free from their original owners. The next time you see somebody wearing a sombrero, fez, or scalp you know immediately who is under it.

The items said to belong to a tribe must and will expand. There will arise disputes over who truly owns sandals or corn. The fight, that is, won’t always be against people-of-no-color, but will expand among the various tribes of of-colors when any is seen to be gaining power another group wants. Stridency must increase.

Well, so much has always been so. Politics is always tribal. It is only the increase in mandatory Diversity that causes tribes to focus less on ideas and more on characteristics and behaviors. The difference is that only one culture, or rather characteristic, is open game. People-of-no-color are everywhere derided, and if they complain, they are accused of fretting about “white genocide”. Call a person-of-no-color a “racist” and if he objects he’s obviously a “white supremacist” evincing “white fragility.”

But you are free to appropriate all the best parts of his culture. Or claim that all the best ideas really came from Wakanda, or wherever, like math. Or when those best parts turn out to be too hard to appropriate, redefine them so that they’re easier, like math.

Addendum I wrote the post before I saw BAP’s response to Anton in American Mind. A must-read. I mean by “must” must. Do it. My review of Bronze Age Mindset is coming soon!

To support this site and its wholly independent host using credit card or PayPal (in any amount) click here

Share this: Facebook

Reddit

Twitter

Pinterest

Email

More

Tumblr

LinkedIn



WhatsApp

Print



