Feeding People is Cultural Appropriation?

[Guest]

Apparently it is racist to cook traditional ethnic foods when you don't share that ancestry.

https://pdx.eater.com/2017/5/22/15677760/portland-kooks-burrito-cultural-appropriation

Well, if that is true, my brother-in-law is in a lot of trouble.  He makes the best sushi I've ever had.  This is why labels like racism should be used with great economy.  People need to understand that it is not necessarily a crime or even a sin to be racist.  As I see it, God Himself is racist.

What we condemn is the harming of individuals.  If I hurt someone, I hurt someone.  Malice is malice.  Whether I hate someone because he is Asian or because he loves the Florida Gators doesn't matter.  If that hate drove me to hurt someone, it's the hurting someone that needs to be condemned, not the racism.

When we start decrying racism as the great sin of our time, then we run into things like "cultural appropriation."  It minimizes the truly malignant racism that drives hatred, and hatred to violence.  All this did was deprive these two women from making a successful business and the people of Portland from having some dang fine burritos.

[anatess2]

@beefche is in trouble...

 

Although it's not a surprise that the Democrats are supporting this stuff since... they're the segregationists!  Woops... did I just type that?

[zil]

13 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

burritos

What!?  This is my specialty.  Of course, I prefer my burritos pretty plain and boring compared to most folk.  Meanwhile, I'm going to have to come up with a new name for them now.  Maybe zilitos.  Or zileatos.  Or zil-eat-those.    And Burrito, the Tree-Climbing Burro™ is going to be upset if he has to change his name (not that he's food, which may be a whole other problem).

[SilentOne]

I guess I'll have to do some pretty extensive research into my recipe books to make sure I'm not making anything invented by a culture I do not descend from. Let's see, I've got Danish, English, Irish, Welsh, I think some French, and an unproven family story of some Native American but I can't recall which tribe.

So, I can keep doing ebleskivers and probably peanut butter sandwiches, but I guess the lasagna and enchiladas will have to go.

Or maybe it's only a problem if I try to charge people for eating them without hunting down and paying the families of whoever originally shared the instructions on how to make lasagna and enchiladas.

[anatess2]

20 minutes ago, SilentOne said:

I guess I'll have to do some pretty extensive research into my recipe books to make sure I'm not making anything invented by a culture I do not descend from. Let's see, I've got Danish, English, Irish, Welsh, I think some French, and an unproven family story of some Native American but I can't recall which tribe.

So, I can keep doing ebleskivers and probably peanut butter sandwiches, but I guess the lasagna and enchiladas will have to go.

Or maybe it's only a problem if I try to charge people for eating them without hunting down and paying the families of whoever originally shared the instructions on how to make lasagna and enchiladas.

Yeah man.  Thou shalt not make pansit unless you pay me for it.

[Guest Godless]

52 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Although it's not a surprise that the Democrats are supporting this stuff since... they're the segregationists!  Woops... did I just type that?

What evidence do you have that this nonsense is endorsed by an actual political party and not just a bunch of hipsters who want to maximize the "authenticity" of their local restaurants? 

If Berkely was a city, that city would be Portland, OR. 

[anatess2]

13 minutes ago, Godless said:

What evidence do you have that this nonsense is endorsed by an actual political party and not just a bunch of hipsters who want to maximize the "authenticity" of their local restaurants? 

If Berkely was a city, that city would be Portland, OR. 

I don't see a smiley... is this question serious?  Do you see the difference between saying "all" anti-cultural appropriation are Democrats versus the Democrat Party are anti-cultural appropriation?

But yes, most, if not all, of the anti-cultural appropriation folks and social justice warriors are Democrats.  Not many, if not none, of the Republicans have a problem with cultural appropriation because this, and other forms of social justice stuff, are in contradiction to constitutional liberty that is a major reason people vote Republican.  But no, this is not to say that all Democrats are anti-cultural appropriation. 

 

Edited May 24, 2017 by anatess2

[Guest Godless]

4 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

I don't see a smiley... is this question serious?  Do you see the difference between saying "all" supporters of cultural appropriation are Democrats versus the Democrat Party support cultural appropriation?

But yes, most, if not all, of the supporters of cultural appropriation and social justice are Democrats.  Not many, if not none, of the Republicans support it because it is in contradiction to constitutional liberty that is a major reason people vote Republican.  But no, this is not to say that all Democrats support cultural appropriation. 

 

The way you worded your post made it sound like this is a politically-endorsed witch hunt. You're right that SJWs are pretty much exclusively Democrats politically, but this doesn't strike me as a political issue, just another moronic social one started by a fairly niche class of liberals.

To flip the coin, let's look at the Confederate flag issue (for the sake of this argument, we'll stick to personal use, not government buildings). Liberals say that it's a symbol of racism. Conservatives (Southern Conservatives primarily) say it's a symbol of their heritage. I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a registered Democrat flying Dixie over his/her front porch. So yes, it's primarily Republicans flying that flag. That doesn't mean that this is a Democrats vs. Republicans issue. It's an issue backed by a fairly niche class of conservatives. Bringing party into it implies a broader partisan support for the issue at hand, and I'm just not convinced that a majority of Republicans look favorably on the Confederate flag, nor that a majority of liberals don't want white people making their ethnic food. These are niche issues, so bringing political parties into it is a bit misleading. 

[anatess2]

48 minutes ago, Godless said:

The way you worded your post made it sound like this is a politically-endorsed witch hunt. You're right that SJWs are pretty much exclusively Democrats politically, but this doesn't strike me as a political issue, just another moronic social one started by a fairly niche class of liberals.

To flip the coin, let's look at the Confederate flag issue (for the sake of this argument, we'll stick to personal use, not government buildings). Liberals say that it's a symbol of racism. Conservatives (Southern Conservatives primarily) say it's a symbol of their heritage. I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a registered Democrat flying Dixie over his/her front porch. So yes, it's primarily Republicans flying that flag. That doesn't mean that this is a Democrats vs. Republicans issue. It's an issue backed by a fairly niche class of conservatives. Bringing party into it implies a broader partisan support for the issue at hand, and I'm just not convinced that a majority of Republicans look favorably on the Confederate flag, nor that a majority of liberals don't want white people making their ethnic food. These are niche issues, so bringing political parties into it is a bit misleading. 

Here's the difference... as I pointed out about segregation...

SJW is a result of Democratic political narratives.  The Democratic Party, for some reason, decided that their voter base is going to be a conglomeration of minorities and they decided to use "victimhood" as their rallying cry.  This directly resulted in SJWs.

The Confederate Battle Flag is a symbol of the South against the Federation.  To the South, this flag represents State's Rights (a Republican principle).  To the North, this flag represents slavery (racism being a Democrat victimhood rallying cry).  So yes, this is still a Democrat/Republican issue post-civil war.  BUT... the Confederate Flag is not a straight Democrat/Republican divide because in the Civil War, the South were Southern Democrats while the Union were a Republican majority.  So, many Republicans all the way to today don't want anything to do with that flag.

 

Edited May 24, 2017 by anatess2

[a mustard seed]

Cultural appropriation is a tool used by racists to convince minorities and non-white ethnicities that segregation is good for them. It's a part of the Balkanization package for controlling the populace. I keep waiting and watching for the tipping point, the "hey...no, wait..." moment when each ethnicity is finally "rewarded" with its own graduation ceremony, its own dorm rooms, its own class rooms, its own drinking fountains, etc.

I watched a video about microaggressions today(TL;DR if you're interested) and the ability to scientifically measure it or define it. I kind of get irate at the point when asking questions that would not be "racist" when asked of a white person(ala, "so, where are you from?") are counted as accidentally aggressive towards minorities simply based on one, narrow interpretation, regardless of intent.

[Guest Godless]

Speaking of burritos, this is the founder/CEO of Chipotle.

 

[yjacket]

3 hours ago, anatess2 said:

The Confederate Battle Flag is a symbol of the South against the Federation.  To the South, this flag represents State's Rights (a Republican principle).  To the North, this flag represents slavery (racism being a Democrat victimhood rallying cry).  So yes, this is still a Democrat/Republican issue post-civil war.  BUT... the Confederate Flag is not a straight Democrat/Republican divide because in the Civil War, the South were Southern Democrats while the Union were a Republican majority.  So, many Republicans all the way to today don't want anything to do with that flag.

It used to (and for a significant portion it still does), but the true South is dying real fast-with those "da#n Yankees" telling us how to run our business.  Apologies to the cuss-filter, but dang Yankees, just doesn't have the same ring to it :-).

Shoot I remember growing up a local city had the KKK march through town (only 25 years ago . . .not a fan of the KKK obviously), well that town today is now significantly Muslim.  Confederate monuments all over the South are being packed up and shipped off to museums.  It is a literal white-washing of history.  History is written by the victors and the South was able to maintain a good bit of it's history, but over the last 25 years it has been destroyed.

Up until probably the mid-80s-90s, the majority of the South was Democrat, or Dixicrats but as the Dems became more and more liberal, eventually the entirety of the South switched from Ds to Rs. The south's ideology didn't change, but the party that represented that ideology did change. For the most part in the South, Ds and Rs are split heavily on race. Most whites are R and most blacks are D.  What is happening in the South is that it is a magnet for jobs and migration.  A significant portion of the country from California to New England and the Northeast are coming South to get away from their stupid state governments and economies.  Unfortunately a lot of these transplants bring their northern/western ideology with them . . .the very same ideology that made their own state crap to live in.

These cities that had Confederate monuments are now majority black and as have black mayors, etc. and they are the ones taking down the monuments. Slavery was absolutely the worst decision this country ever made-if it weren't for slavery a lot of things would be very, very different.  The interesting thing about the Civil War and that time period was that the North was just as racist as the South-Black Codes for example.  Ultimately, the Civil War boiled down to political power rather than slavery.  Slavery was just a convenient excuse.  The North hated blacks, and didn't want them to be apart of their society-but they hated the South even more for things like the 3/5ths compromise that gave the South additional representation in Congress for slaves. It wasn't so much slavery, but the political power that the Southern states were able to hold b/c of slavery and the vast differences in opinion about the proper roles of government (the vast majority of small government founders came from the South).

So if you take down a statue of Robert E. Lee, why not take down a statue of Jefferson or Washington?  I imagine in my lifetime I will see the sandblasting of Stone Mountain in GA with the Southern heroes of the Civil War, Lee, Davis, Jackson.  It's very similar to what the Taliban and ISIS does in the middle east, but in the name of SJW we've got to take down those monuments!

Unfortunately most people just do not understand the absolute utter hell the South paid for losing the war (and they came close a couple of times to winning amazingly enough) and Fort Sumner was a much more complex issue were the South was politically outmaneuvered and ended up firing the first shot (even though prior to that they sent ambassadors to Lincoln to work out a peaceful resolution and he refused to see them). They lost everything and while it was nice that the North didn't execute any of the generals, Reconstruction was just horrible.

 

[yjacket]

2 hours ago, a mustard seed said:

It's a part of the Balkanization package for controlling the populace.

Balkanization of people is just the history of the world. Countries became countries b/c the people inside the borders of that country have extremely similar ethnicity, background, culture, etc.  

In general bad things happen when you try and shove different cultures together over mass groups of people . . .it just doesn't work well.  The Civil War, essentially you had two completely different countries trying to live under one banner.  They shared a common background of being colonies of GB, speaking english and fighting off GB but that was about it. The religion of the South was different than the North (baptists vs. Catholics and protestants), the underlying culture was drastically different (slavery vs. non-slavery . .. agricultural vs. industrial) and a war was fought over it.

Look at Iraq-it really should be three countries with the Kurds in the north, and Sunnies and Shias splitting the rest but after WW2, the European powers thought it would be a great idea to literally draw lines in the sand and call this box Iraq-big problems. It's one of the reasons WW2 started with Hitler.  After WW1 lines were drawn and ethnic Germans were put into countries like Poland. Part of the reason Hitler invaded those countries was to reclaim the parts that were ethnically Germans.

The history of the world is full of examples were the combination of different cultures ends up leading to really bad things-generally war or civil war. And the history of the world has examples of what happens when countries do not maintain cohesion in their underlying culture . . .they disintegrate.  

And the same thing will happen to the US, this idea of a huge melting pot is a myth.  Up until 1964 the immigration policy in the US was very strictly limited to European countries and cultures.  The individuals that came assimilated pretty quickly and within a generation there was almost no way to tell that they were immigrants.  That is quite different than it is today.  Immigrants today aren't giving up their culture and assimilating, they are bringing their culture here and saying "you must accept my culture or you are racist".  That will lead to very bad things in the future.  

All you need to do to see the future is to look at the Manchester bomber.  He was born in England to Libyan immigrants.  His name is Salman Abedi.40 years ago, with assimilation his parents would have named him Sal or Saloman or something British, but no, they immigrated to England and wanted to make England like were they came from so he has a name Salman . . .even though he was born in England he isn't English-it's a cultural takeover.  And unless people wake up to what is occurring right under their noses, more of this crap happens until you are the minority in a country you grew up in and your ancestors grew up in.

And I guarantee you other cultures aren't so understanding of minorities as modern Western cultures are. 

[eddified]

7 hours ago, Godless said:

What evidence do you have that this nonsense is endorsed by an actual political party and not just a bunch of hipsters who want to maximize the "authenticity" of their local restaurants? 

If Berkely was a city, that city would be Portland, OR. 

Haha, Berkeley *is* a city. Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkeley,_California

[Guest Godless]

12 hours ago, eddified said:

Haha, Berkeley *is* a city. Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkeley,_California

Lol, you got me there. I was referring to UC Berkeley, but I suppose the city it resides in probably isn't much better. Nice catch.

[anatess2]

17 hours ago, Godless said:

Speaking of burritos, this is the founder/CEO of Chipotle.

 

His cheekbones look Mexican. 

 

 

[omegaseamaster75]

18 hours ago, Godless said:

Speaking of burritos, this is the founder/CEO of Chipotle.

 

Burritos aren't Mexican, not the way Americans do them.

Cesar Salad isn't Italian (invented in Mexico by Italians) and Germans Chocolate cake isn't German

Edited May 25, 2017 by omegaseamaster75

[pam]

23 hours ago, Carborendum said:

Apparently it is racist to cook traditional ethnic foods when you don't share that ancestry.

 

I guess I'm a racist then because my entire meal this Sunday will be from a country that I don't share the ancestry from.

[zil]

4 minutes ago, pam said:

I guess I'm a racist then because my entire meal this Sunday will be from a country that I don't share the ancestry from.

But you and all the people in that country share a common ancestor, so I think you've got a pretty good defense - it's like borrowing the recipe from your cousin.  Maybe @Just_A_Guy could open a side-business defending people's dinner choices in World-Gone-Crazy Court.

[Just_A_Guy]

2 minutes ago, zil said:

But you and all the people in that country share a common ancestor, so I think you've got a pretty good defense - it's like borrowing the recipe from your cousin.  Maybe @Just_A_Guy could open a side-business defending people's dinner choices in World-Gone-Crazy Court.

Sorry; I'm working for The Man nowadays.

[zil]

4 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Sorry; I'm working for The Man nowadays.

What if your customers paid you in dinners?  Admit it, you're thinking about it now.

[askandanswer]

On 2017-5-25 at 3:30 AM, Carborendum said:

 All this did was deprive these two women from making a successful business and the people of Portland from having some dang fine burritos.

Sounds culturally inappropriate to me  

[Guest]

On 5/24/2017 at 1:59 PM, Godless said:

The way you worded your post made it sound like this is a politically-endorsed witch hunt. You're right that SJWs are pretty much exclusively Democrats politically, but this doesn't strike me as a political issue, just another moronic social one started by a fairly niche class of liberals.

To flip the coin, let's look at the Confederate flag issue (for the sake of this argument, we'll stick to personal use, not government buildings). Liberals say that it's a symbol of racism. Conservatives (Southern Conservatives primarily) say it's a symbol of their heritage. I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a registered Democrat flying Dixie over his/her front porch. So yes, it's primarily Republicans flying that flag. That doesn't mean that this is a Democrats vs. Republicans issue. It's an issue backed by a fairly niche class of conservatives. Bringing party into it implies a broader partisan support for the issue at hand, and I'm just not convinced that a majority of Republicans look favorably on the Confederate flag, nor that a majority of liberals don't want white people making their ethnic food. These are niche issues, so bringing political parties into it is a bit misleading. 

If it is just a "niche" class of liberals, why did a business get shut down because of it?  And this isn't the only one.  This is a widespread problem.  It is NOT isolated.

The Confederate flag is the opposite side of the coin.  But not in the way you describe.  You're saying it is a liberal/conservative thing.  I say it is a liberty thing.

Is it MORE or LESS liberty to allow someone to run a restaurant the way they want?  What did liberals do?  What would conservatives do?

Is it MORE or LESS liberty to allow someone to fly a flag (of whatever nature)?  What did liberals do?  What would conservatives do?

For me, it is about liberty.  What are you expecting people to do?  What is the desire of a liberty minded person?  Face it.  LIberals are more about freedom and less about liberty than conservatives.

Edited May 26, 2017 by Guest

[eddified]

40 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

 

For me, it is about liberty.  What are you expecting people to do?  What is the desire of a liberty minded person?  Face it.  LIberals are more about freedom and less about liberty than conservatives.

I'm struggling to see what is meant by "Freedom" in this context and how it's different than liberty. I would phrase it "liberals are more about helping "victims" (whatever that means) and conservatives are about freedom and liberty. "

[eddified]

This article about cultural appropriation of food shows a very disturbing trend. It shows a trend away from Christ-like love of all fellow human beings. It shows a trend towards race-based discord and vindictiveness. Very disturbing.