Kialo requires cookies to work correctly.
Cultural appropriation is wrong
Integrating different cultures is one of the main way for cultures to develop themselves.
Cultural appropriation has stimulated growth and newer ways of thinking and doing things that entice, delight, and challenge traditional thought models and conventional wisdom.
Removing the ability to assimilate parts of other cultures is a recipe for cultural stagnation and decline.
In terms of culinary traditions, many cultures have adopted ingredients from other regions of the world, to the extent that they seem like staples today.
Adopting aspects of other cultures can spark a vitalization in one's own culture, and can later be deemed an "authentic" aspect. It is relative to the time period, and there will always be conservative, fundamentalist, cultural purists.
Globalization makes cultural appropriation an inevitability. As harmony spreads between cultures, so will mimicry.
It is sometimes quite hard to correctly establish the true origin of some cultural traits and aspects. Some cultural elements, now associated with some cultures were actually borrowed from others (sometimes when they fell out of use in origin cultures).
Cultures evolve over time by absorbing desirable elements from other cultures and shedding undesirable elements from their own.
Labeling cultural appropriation as integrating cultures sugar coats the way in which certain cultures have historically been 'adopted' by means of violence and force, not willingly.
Sharing cultures is important, but removing any sense of individuality from cultures that have already suffered from assimilation and forced cultural changes in the past does not seem fair. We should stop further oppressing the oppressed.
Society can't speak of "cultures integrating or developing themselves" in the abstract; culture isn't some entity on a quest of self-realization. Specific actors perform and benefit from the integration. This is where the notion of property and its history comes into play.