There's about 500 years of history that thoroughly explain why it is not considered appropriation when non-Western people adopt Western practices. Lots of things only "go one way" when we are dealing with massive power imbalances.
I was referring to Ireland, whose colonisation[1][2] during the 16th and 17th centuries served almost as a prototype for future British expansion. Gaelic culture was nearly wiped out due to British policies, and even to this day, Irish is a severely endangered language. It remains the one of the few regions in Europe with a lower population in the present than it had in 1800.
But sure, let's call it a historical anomaly.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plantations_of_Ireland
[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cromwellian_conquest_of_Irelan...
> But that is not what we historically consider to be the multi-hundred year era of colonization than killed untold millions and impacted the lives of almost every non-Western person on the planet.
Ok. So again, I ask: what's the difference? There was a seizure of lands, systematic eradication of culture and language over the course of several hundred years, mass discrimination, and millions killed in conflicts and famine. What part of that makes it distinct from other instances of colonization?
The point I think you're trying to make is that different rules apply for cultural appropriation for white people than they do for people of color. Would you agree?
Aww, why'd you have to go and point that out? I was having fun beating around that bush...
But more seriously, I would have preferred to hear that from the poster. I specifically avoided putting those words in their mouth, despite being tempted to a few times; and also to avoid getting dragged down into a debate of whatever "white" means.
Rome violently occupied most of Europe and forced its culture on to those peoples. Therefore, most Europeans may eat as much pizza as they like. But if an Italian so much as looks at a croissant or wears pants, they've done A Cultural Appropriation.
Seems sensible to me!
Then yes, people could be pissed at Rome companies also producing "Rome croissant" that were to globally compete with French croissants and take their place on other countries' shelves.