All-purpose news and politics thread: Two Steps Beyond!

[ed2962]

Donald Trump Reports He’s Getting Rich as President

It has always been clear, Trump is doing this for the money.

I've always believed that this was his true motivation.

[Malvolio]

I've always believed that this was his true motivation.

Of course it is. He never really wanted to be President, but now that he is, he's making the most out of it. And by most, I mean money.

[Mister Mets]

The United Nations is taking early steps to make cultural appropriation illegal.

As we learn every festival season, and all other seasons too, there's still a lot of confusion around the difference between appreciation and appropriation. There could soon be a strong incentive to get educated: jail time. Because being called out on the internet doesn't seem to be stopping the proliferation of runway chola bangs and high street Navajo panties.

Indigenous groups around the world are currently calling on the United Nations to make the appropriation of native cultures illegal, reports CBA News. A special committee has been asking for sanctions since 2001, long before Twitter and Instagram became the default ways for offended communities to call out BS and make their cases heard. This week, though, the ball is really getting rolling. Delegates from 189 countries are currently meeting in Geneva as part of a specialized international committee within the UN's World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).

The committee is pushing for three pieces of international law to put sanctions place. This will expand international property regulations to protect indigenous property ranging from designs to language. The UN should "obligate states to create effective criminal and civil enforcement procedures to recognize and prevent the non-consensual taking and illegitimate possession, sale and export of traditional cultural expressions," James Anaya, dean of law at the University of Colorado, told the committee. Anaya took explicit aim at Urban Outfitters's aforementioned Navajo line, which resulted in the Navajo Nation slapping the company with a lawsuit in 2012. (The case was eventually settled out of court.)

Given that these products keep happening, the committee is understandably irritated that it's taken 16 years for negotiations to reach Geneva. Aroha Te Pareake Mead, a member of the Ngati Awa and Ngati Porou tribes in New Zealand, noted that many national indigenous groups don't even know the committee exists. "We are only halfway through 2017 and yet the number of occurrences of misappropriation happening to indigenous peoples in all regions of the world seems relentless with no relief in sight," she said. It will likely take some time to define the borders of appropriation — baby hairs are foggier territory than headdresses — but at least the conversation is moving forward.

This is the kind of thing that reminds me why there have to be significant checks on liberals.

[Tami]

The United Nations is taking early steps to make cultural appropriation illegal.



This is the kind of thing that reminds me why there have to be significant checks on liberals.

I do not get your reasoning at all. What you said is not only wrong but it makes no sense.

[Kirby101]

The United Nations is taking early steps to make cultural appropriation illegal.



This is the kind of thing that reminds me why there have to be significant checks on liberals.

As opposed to conservatives, who only want their religious bigotry enshrined int law. Or their right to pollute. Or the removal of all protection for working people.etc....

It's the liberals that are problems because some indigenous people want to protect their culture.

[Gray Lensman]

As opposed to conservatives, who only want their religious bigotry enshrined int law. Or their right to pollute. Or the removal of all protection for working people.etc....

It's the liberals that are problems because some indigenous people want to protect their culture.

There needs to be checks on any group amassing too much political power, conservative or liberal.

One of the issues with the concept of cultural appropriation is it means different things to different people. There is a difference between a mascot which is based on a negative stereotype (which I'd say is certainly bad) and being offended that the campus cafeteria is serving Chinese-American food one day (such people need to get a life).

A few links (which after reading I think offer balanced takes from both sides)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_appropriation

In Defense of Cultural Appropraition by Kenan Malik (New York Times)

What's Wrong With Cultural Appropraiton? by Maisha Z. Johnson (Everyday Feminism)

[Mister Mets]

As opposed to conservatives, who only want their religious bigotry enshrined int law. Or their right to pollute. Or the removal of all protection for working people.etc....

It's the liberals that are problems because some indigenous people want to protect their culture.

You can simultaneously believe that conservatives are often wrong, and disagree with the people who want to make cultural appropriation illegal.

The problem here isn't indigenous people wanting to protect their culture; it is people wanting to use the power of the law/ government to punish someone making headdresses.

I do not get your reasoning at all. What you said is not only wrong but it makes no sense.

I think the policy being suggested (criminal and civil penalties for cultural appropriation) is dumb. I am worried that there are any advocates for it, and that it's getting a hearing at the United Nations. It appears to be a liberal/ left-wing issue, and an example of policy that might be implemented if there weren't checks and limits on the left.

[Tami]

You can simultaneously believe that conservatives are often wrong, and disagree with the people who want to make cultural appropriation illegal.

The problem here isn't indigenous people wanting to protect their culture; it is people wanting to use the power of the law/ government to punish someone making headdresses.



I think the policy being suggested (criminal and civil penalties for cultural appropriation) is dumb. I am worried that there are any advocates for it, and that it's getting a hearing at the United Nations. It appears to be a liberal/ left-wing issue, and an example of policy that might be implemented if there weren't checks and limits on the left.

Indigenous people have one problem that majority of other cultures don't have, they don't have their own countries. A country, like Japan or Germany or Sweden has more legal say in how much of their native culture they want to share with the rest of the world and how much they want to keep within their boarders.

People who either have very small 'nations' or no nation at all are often overtaken by those from much larger countries. It is simply a way of preserving what is left of these cultures before they vanish all together.

[Tami]

In some ways it's also not that dissimilar to a scenario where a company creates a line of products and names these products after you and after all of your family members, without your consent and without you receiving anything in return. Even worse if these products have nothing to do with you and if they are insulting, degrading and/or embarrassing.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

That's not a good reason to make a law saying people can't make or wear certain things. Also it's a false analogy to say that it's similar to a company making products about a specific person. A specific person or people in a culture doesn't own the the style of clothes or accessories that culture is associated with. Not for nothing countries like Germany, Japan or Sweden don't go around mandating laws be put in place so people don't make or wear their styles of clothes and eat their styles of food. If independent entities want to disassociate with people who do that, that's absolutely fine. World governments just shouldn't be involved in that.

[Adam Allen]

The United Nations is taking early steps to make cultural appropriation illegal.



This is the kind of thing that reminds me why there have to be significant checks on liberals.

The article behind the link says that committee has been at work on creating the law they refer to since 2001. If it has taken this long to complete the early stages...

Anyway, Tami has a point about what "indigenous" means ... the 189 UN delegates would be from nations recognized as autonomous states, like the US and Canada. The indigenous cultures that survive are the descendants of people decimated by these states. In other words, you have people who have been victimized, appealing to the powers that hurt them in the first place.

[Handsome men don't lose fights]

I hope they don't go overboard with this thing. It's exactly the kind of thing that can lead to thousands of frivolous lawsuits. I can already imagine some huckster hoping to get rich by suing a chain restaurant. "Chippotles/Panda Express/Applebees/Cracker Barrel are stealing from my proud cultural heritage!" I hope it's legislation that deals with things like corporations ignoring the wishes of indigenous people (like the Washington Redskins). I think twitter already does a decent enough job of calling out offensive Halloween costumes.

[The Darknight Detective]

I hope they don't go overboard with this thing. It's exactly the kind of thing that can lead to thousands of frivolous lawsuits. I can already imagine some huckster hoping to get rich by suing a chain restaurant. "Chippotles/Panda Express/Applebees/Cracker Barrel are stealing from my proud cultural heritage!" I hope it's legislation that deals with things like corporations ignoring the wishes of indigenous people (like the Washington Redskins). I think twitter already does a decent enough job of calling out offensive Halloween costumes.

Where there's money, there will be lawsuits. Personally, I'm suing any non-Irish/Italian person who is selling St. Patrick's Day items or pasta.

[Tami]

I hope they don't go overboard with this thing. It's exactly the kind of thing that can lead to thousands of frivolous lawsuits. I can already imagine some huckster hoping to get rich by suing a chain restaurant. "Chippotles/Panda Express/Applebees/Cracker Barrel are stealing from my proud cultural heritage!" I hope it's legislation that deals with things like corporations ignoring the wishes of indigenous people (like the Washington Redskins). I think twitter already does a decent enough job of calling out offensive Halloween costumes.

There are issues on both sides. I agree that this can be taken too far if those involved in it aren't careful.

Ultimately, the point is giving those without power a bit more power over their own lives and culture. There probably will have to be limits on this, but the way I see it, that it is something Courts can argue about over time and the fine points can be worked out over time. I think it's worth the risk to give people a voice who have been silenced for so long.

[Adam Allen]

I think it's also worth noting that the UN does not really dictate laws that control the internal governments of any of its member states. The 2,000,000 people currently locked up in the US are not there for violating any laws made by the UN.

The UN could decide cultural appropriation is illegal tomorrow if it wanted; the US government would ignore the hell of out of it.