3 ms·

I think your example is discarding too much of the context. Rather than considering this through a racial lens, I think it would be more accurate to view it as

I think your example is discarding too much of the context. Rather than considering this through a racial lens, I think it would be more accurate to view it as an act of cultural stewardship - where the cultural separation, as in many parts of the world, largely follows racial and tribal lines. When thought of as a cultural act, it makes much more sense. Cultures implicitly lay claim to information i.e. their cultural heritage, all the time. It's also less surprising that you can find the concept itself "bananas", because the value system of your culture won't necessarily line up with that of other cultures and their stewards.

luckylion 5y ago
> Cultures implicitly lay claim to information i.e. their cultural heritage, all the time. They do? How do you "own" cultural heritage? It sounds like the first step before accusing others of cultural robbery when they wear their hair a certain way or have a tattoo. I get the impression that anyone being in favor for that kind of thing hasn't thought it through. If your ethnic group can lay claim to some hairstyle, the dominant group automatically gets to claim all the stuff they introduced you to. It's a bad trade to get to decide who can wear dread locks, but have to give up all the benefits of modern society.
- ivanbakel 5y ago
  >They do? How do you "own" cultural heritage? Well, the most obvious route is the legal one. Lots of cultures have legislation protecting the authenticity of certain kinds of products, like food - even if those products can be reproduced exactly elsewhere. You are not allowed to call your homemade cheese "parmigiano", no matter its quality or ingredients, because the recipe is "owned" by the cheesemakers of an area around Parma. There's even information ownership in fields which are ostensibly about physical things. Museums are full of objects whose historical value comes from the information they provide about the past - and in many places, that information is considered important enough for people to go to great lengths to make it available to the public. Countries often ban the export of historical artifacts, because it is felt that the public "own" the artifacts and the knowledge they can communicate.
  - luckylion 5y ago
    They don't own the information/recipe, they own a trade mark. That's very different. You can absolutely make parmigiano, you just can't call it that. For artifacts etc: it's about the physical items. I'm not aware of a nation outlawing e.g. discussion or reproduction of that artifact anywhere else in the world.

luckylion 5y ago

> Cultures implicitly lay claim to information i.e. their cultural heritage, all the time. They do? How do you "own" cultural heritage? It sounds like the first step before accusing others of cultural robbery when they wear their hair a certain way or have a tattoo. I get the impression that anyone being in favor for that kind of thing hasn't thought it through. If your ethnic group can lay claim to some hairstyle, the dominant group automatically gets to claim all the stuff they introduced you to. It's a bad trade to get to decide who can wear dread locks, but have to give up all the benefits of modern society.

ivanbakel 5y ago
>They do? How do you "own" cultural heritage? Well, the most obvious route is the legal one. Lots of cultures have legislation protecting the authenticity of certain kinds of products, like food - even if those products can be reproduced exactly elsewhere. You are not allowed to call your homemade cheese "parmigiano", no matter its quality or ingredients, because the recipe is "owned" by the cheesemakers of an area around Parma. There's even information ownership in fields which are ostensibly about physical things. Museums are full of objects whose historical value comes from the information they provide about the past - and in many places, that information is considered important enough for people to go to great lengths to make it available to the public. Countries often ban the export of historical artifacts, because it is felt that the public "own" the artifacts and the knowledge they can communicate.
- luckylion 5y ago
  They don't own the information/recipe, they own a trade mark. That's very different. You can absolutely make parmigiano, you just can't call it that. For artifacts etc: it's about the physical items. I'm not aware of a nation outlawing e.g. discussion or reproduction of that artifact anywhere else in the world.