Boston Herald

‘Cultural appropriat­ion’ not always an insult

- By JONAH GOLDBERG Jonah Goldberg’s new book, “Suicide of the West,” is available wherever books are sold.

I am very critical of China’s government. It’s corrupt, authoritar­ian and in some respects totalitari­an. I have deep reservatio­ns about Chinese culture as well. The Chinese government bans sex-selective abortions — i.e., killing females in utero — but Chinese people still do it in staggering numbers. China also practices ethnic discrimina­tion that would be instantly recognizab­le as a kind of Jim Crow or apartheid if the majority Han Chinese were white and minorities such as the Uighurs were black. I could go on, but you get the point.

The reason I bring all of this up is that I want to be clear that my imminent praise for China is selective, even grudging. But you’ve got to hand it to China. It has something we’re sorely missing today: civilizati­onal confidence.

Exhibit A: The Chinese think we’re idiots when it comes to the absurd panic over “cultural appropriat­ion.”

By now you’ve probably heard that an American teenager wore a traditiona­l Chinese dress to her prom. The young lady, Keziah Daum, is not ethnically Chinese or Asian. And like Pavlov’s dogs responding to the dinner bell, thousands of Twitter hounds rained abuse on Daum for the great alleged sin of “cultural appropriat­ion.”

Cultural appropriat­ion was originally a sociologic­al term to describe how a majority culture borrows or adapts from a minority culture some custom, fashion, cuisine or practice. At some point, alas, it went from being descriptiv­e to proscripti­ve.

Proscripti­ve rules tell people what they cannot do. And while it’s not quite a law (yet), save on some college campuses, there’s an organized and passionate movement to pass a new social commandmen­t: “Thou shalt not appropriat­e someone else’s culture.”

It must be noted that this is different than saying, “Thou shalt not mock or denigrate someone else’s culture.” That’s a valuable social norm. But this is a distinctio­n the anti-culturalap­propriatio­n forces want to obliterate. They argue that any form of cultural appropriat­ion is essentiall­y indistingu­ishable from attacking someone’s culture.

And that is idiotic.

Without cultural appropriat­ion, American blacks would never have picked up European musical instrument­s to create the blues and jazz. Without cultural appropriat­ion, white and black artists alike would never have spun these wonderful creations into rock ’n’ roll.

Nearly every meal you’ve ever eaten is the byproduct of centuries of cultural appropriat­ion, to one extent or another. This column is written in English, a language that contains hundreds of thousands of words appropriat­ed from other tongues.

Christiani­ty was a Middle Eastern religion “appropriat­ed” by Europeans. Cultural appropriat­ion manifested itself in every society and civilizati­on since the concepts of society and civilizati­on were born.

But Western civilizati­on is a bit different than other civilizati­ons because, until very recently, it prided itself for its ability to embrace and borrow from other cultures. To be sure, some of that appropriat­ion happened at the tip of a sword or gun, but show me a civilizati­on that wasn’t true of at one point or another.

Alas, the Puritan tradition in America takes funny new forms. So today, people can appropriat­e a different gender, but don’t you dare wear a sombrero if you have the wrong DNA, never mind invent a Korean taco or wear a Chinese dress to the prom. I don’t take much pride in the fact that Chinese elites wear Western jackets and ties, but I don’t see why it should offend anyone either.

Which brings me back to China. The New York Times did a great journalist­ic service this week: It investigat­ed whether the Chinese were offended by Daum’s alleged hate crime. The overwhelmi­ng response? Nope. Chinese social media and cultural commentato­rs celebrated Daum’s decision as a compliment.

But in America, unfortunat­ely, some people are so insecure in their identity and so desperate to be offended they have breathed new life into H.L. Mencken’s definition of puritanism: “the haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States