Juan Ignacio Valdivia Cox

Cultural Appropiation

“Authentic Mexican Food” A word commonly used in many small and giant “Mexican”

restaurants such as Chipotle or El jefes. Though it might seem simple at first, under this

simple statement lies an ever more important topic in todays globalized and post

colonialist world: Cultural appropriation. Sadly, most of the real discussions regarding

this topic are held far away from mainstream society, leaving most people in a

precarious position which has transformed this word into a tool of censorship. Loosely

defined as “the taking, from a culture that is not one’s own, of intellectual property,

cultural expressions, or artifacts, history and ways of knowledge” (Ziff, Borrowed

Power), it has mostly been used as an instrument in the machine of cancel culture,

“where individuals ‘withdraw attention from someone or something whose values,

(in)action, or speech are so offensive.”(Sailofsky, 2022). When approaching both of

these definitions, we can begin to reach a basic conclusion: that “taking something that

is not one’s own”, especially without one’s consent can result offensive, therefore, due

to its nature society should peruse to eliminate these actions with the use of Cancel

culture. However, to state this would make the grave mistake of not seeing the whole

picture, The correctness of this phenomenon must not be restricted in the view of only

those who suffer but must be expanded to also incorporate those who gain from it to,

understanding the full consequences of such actions. When doing this we begin to

realize that we should not conform this phenomenon to an only restrictive nature, rather

we must find a balance that allows it to happen in a way that respects both parties in the

transaction.
When taking a deeper dive in the phenomenon of Cultural Appropriation we being to

realize that it can be further divided into four different scenarios; Exchange, dominance,

exploitation and transculturation. When analyzed further we begin to separate these

definitions into two different sections. First, we have those constituted by Cultural

dominance and exploitation, both of these are categorized by an exchange that has its

base on an unlevelled power ground, in which one party exerts dominance over the

other, therefore they will not be of much relevance in this essay. On the other hand, we

have the other group made up by cultural Exchange and transculturation, which have a

more leveled aspect in their approach to the mixture of cultures, with this last one

focusing on the creation of new cultures made in these processes.

When thinking about these actions I can remember vividly my first week of college,

some friends and I decided to grab something to eat nearby. We decided to enter a

restaurant that stated: “Authentic Mexican Food”. Yet when arriving my Mexican friend

said out right that we should leave as it was not really authentic food and that he was

offended with this horrible representation. He later explained that this lied in how the

food was changed of its essence, using wheat tortillas rather than corn and how most of

the restaurant was rather used as a generalization of Latino culture, being served by

center Americans, playing “Bachata”- a Dominican genre, and selling “Inca Kola” a

Peruvian drink.

What my friend was trying to express is that he was not in favor of “cultural

degradation”- a characteristic of cultural appropriation in which the dominant culture

distorts that which it appropriates, something that can lead to “Corrosive effects on the

integrity of an exploited culture” (Ziff & Rao, 1997, p9). This can be clearly seen in the

effects that these Mexican restaurants were having on my friend and more importantly
the degraded image it has created on the entirety of the Mexican and Latino born

community. In spite of this I would like to make clear that I am not against this

gastronomic invention, it is one that is important in both American and American born

Latino culture, the problem lying here is in how the marketization wrongly absorbs

members separate from its community. I believe the correct way of approaching this

would be with a sign stating Latino-American food, recognizing the true source of the

food rather than perusing an only goal of capital gain. Additionally, I have been able to

see the effects of this marketization straight on, with most Americans -dominant

culture- thinking that Chile is simply just part of Mexico or that Latinos in general are

all like that “Mexican” image that this appropriation has created.

When trying to find a way of fixing this we must first realize that as most things this is

not of white or black nature. On one hand we have the reality that this exploitation can

sometimes create unfavorable situations for the affected cultures, creating a situation in

which their own identity is affected. However, what we can’t deny in this situation and

almost all cultural appropriations, is its positive economic implications, in this example

we can appreciate how the “Mexican” food industry supports 55 billion dollars to the

American economy and a total of 912,238 jobs. (Ibis world). Under clear Utilitarian

philosophy- that in which the consequences of an action are what define the correctness

of it- we can state that this decision is clearly ethically right since the amount of utility

created is superior than the pain. When following this argument, we begin to realize that

these actions are only acceptable under the condition that those profited are more than

those harmed, something that will almost always be true in the globalized capitalistic.

Although convincing, I do believe that the principle of maximizing utility can also serve

those marginalized, in the end is it possible to enable cultural appropriation to happen in

a more humane way whilst also keeping the positive aspects of it. Some people might

respond that it should be denied for almost all the cases, only being accepted if those

profiting are from that Sayed culture. Clearly these people lack the ability to see the big

picture. Going back to the previous four divisions of cultural appropriation we can see

that it is indeed possible to push this phenomenon into a more fair and just nature, by

enacting laws that force appropriations to be of exchange and transculturation. Although

I do recognize that I believe that they are all ethically correct this does not mean that

one situation is not more correct than the other. These laws of which I talk should strive

to ensure that there is a respect for both parties, something that would increment even

further the total utility all round. Though when looking at both I do believe that the

nature of these restrictions should try to apply the transculturation root. Defined as

“cultural elements created from and/or by multiple cultures, such that identification of a

single originating culture is problematic”. (Rodgers, 2007), these creations would help

create a single culture created of the mixture of those subcultures, which in the long run

would help diminish substantially the unpleasure of these actions. In case of this not

being possible then should we follow the road of Cultural exchange, one which states

that the appropriation should only exist if both parties have a similar footing ground,

being regulated in order to allow for a just exchange, as is done with most transactions

in the world.

To sum up Cultural appropriation is not necessarily a morally wrong phenomenon if

done in a correct way. It is because of this that we should stop using this word as a tool

of cancel culture and work towards regulation that allows it to be of positive

consequences on society, focusing on bending its nature towards that of cultural

transculturation and exchange.

 Bibliography

1) Ziff, B, & Rao,P. V. (1997). Introduction to cultural appropriation: A framework for

analysis. In B.Ziff & P. V. Rao (Eds.), Borrowed power: Essays on cultural
appropriation (pp.1–27). New Brunswick, NJ : Rutgers University Press .
2) Rodgers, R. (2007, November 4). Communication Theory. Oxford academic.
Retrieved from https://academic.oup.com/ct/article/16/4/474/4098676?
login=true 
3) Industry market research, reports, and Statistics. IBISWorld. (n.d.). Retrieved
February 4, 2022, from https://www.ibisworld.com/united-states/market-
research-reports/mexican-restaurants-industry/ 
4) Sailofsky, D. (2022, August 31). Masculinity, cancel culture and woke
capitalism: Exploring Twitter response to Brendan Leipsic’s leaked
conversation. Sage journals. Retrieved February 21, 2022, from Masculinity,
cancel culture and woke capitalism: Exploring Twitter response to Brendan
Leipsic’s leaked conversation