| Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format |
| Celtic Radio Community > The Grove > Cultural Thieft |
| Posted by: Shadows 25-Nov-2005, 11:38 AM |
| I have seen some posts on other boards referencing "cultural thieft"... what is it and can it really exist if we are all the same human beings? |
| Posted by: stoirmeil 26-Nov-2005, 04:01 PM |
| Since you're in this forum, I'm assuming this has to do with "cultural theft" of some aspect of spiritual practice? (If I'm wrong, please pardon me. . . ) I have seen it said before (in another spiritual context -- one of the monotheisms) that newcomers who have not grown up in the whole context of a belief, can sometimes practice a kind of "smorgasbord" version of it in which they pick and choose features and rituals that appeal to them with no real rhyme or reason to the choices, while having no particular desire to work at greater understanding or coherence of the symbolic system as a deeper whole. There also seems to be some concern, among more serious practitioners, about the appearance this creates or the impression it makes on the world at large. When you say "we are all the same human beings," are you saying we all have a right to explore each others' cultural paths to the spiritual life? I would have a hard time disagreeing with that, but I would also say that with the right comes the responsibility to treat traditions with respect and not approach them superficially only for the features that take our fancy. |
| Posted by: Swanny 27-Nov-2005, 05:03 AM |
| Many Native American "traditionalists" are very much concerned about allegedly "Native" ceremonies being 'adopted' by non-Indian people in a manner that is way outside the context of the Native culture in which they originated. Of even greater concern is the "bastardization" of tribal beliefs and/or ceremonies, changing those beliefs or ceremonies in ways that are not consistent with the culture, or 'morphing' these ceremonies and beliefs with those of other cultures (i.e. New-Age belief systems). An Absaroka gentleman of my acquaintance explained his position thusly: "First the Whites came and stole away our furs, then our buffalo. Then they stole away our children, took away our language, and now they want to steal our religion." Actually, some not-so-tradionalists are also very much concerned that the practice leads to continued stereotyping of Native Americans, NA lifestyles and NA beliefs. Here is an article by Terri Jean, first published in about 2000, that explains one perspective of the issue: http://users.pandora.be/gohiyuhi/articles/art00005.htm Two tribes that are especially affected by the issue are the Cherokee (everybody's great grandmother was a Cherokee Princess) and the collective tribes of the Sioux Nation (Lakota, Dakota and Nakota). In 1993 the latter drafted a formal declaration of war against exploiters of Lakota spirituality, which can be referenced at http://www.aics.org/war.html Does cultural theft occur? When a person with no Indian blood whatsoever and who has never in his/her life been intimately involved in a specific tribal culture takes a half-baked notion of an "authentic Indian ceremony" and sells it to others in the form of a book, or "for hire" ceremonies I believe it definately is a theft. Swanny |
| Posted by: John Clements 20-Dec-2007, 03:27 PM |
| You know, when I was a youngster. I actually considered becoming a “Roman Catholic Priest”. But then I grew up, when I learned that the greatest story ever told, is in fact just that, a story. A story which was blatantly plagiarized, (yes can you imagine, plagiarized) from the Egyptian’s, some 3000 years be for Christ. Now please don’t get me wrong. I’m not just down on Christianity. I happen to think that religion in general, does more harm than good, except for perhaps Paganism, which I believe is based on astrology, and "real" natural events. If you think I’ve gone off, check out the evidence for yourself. http://zeitgeistmovie.com/ |
| Posted by: Rebecca Ann 20-Dec-2007, 04:30 PM |
| Our culture and our heritage is being stolen from us. Whenever a people takes over another it seems that they first attack the culture to weaken the people. The English long ago came into Ireland and the wearing of the green, the playing of the harp, or the speaking of the language was forbidden. They did the same in Scotland with the wearing of the kilt and the playing of the pipes. That is until the English got smart and realized the pipes held a strange beast that scared away the enemy. Then they put the pipers in the front as they marched into battle. Some cultures have chosen to mix and joined together the best of both to preserve them both but many others have been lost through the ages. Take away the language, legends, dress, etc. and you can control a people. Take away their music and you take away their hope. Today many of us are of mixed race, especially in America. Many of our ancestors came from the old world but as my grandmother always taught me some where already here to welcome the others. Learn all you can of all your ancestors and their ways and teach your children for this is your culture and your heritage. RebeccaAnn |
| Posted by: oldraven 20-Dec-2007, 06:33 PM | ||
I just wanted everyone to read that again.   |
| Posted by: John Clements 15-Jan-2008, 08:32 AM |
| Dear Rebecca Ann, and oldraven, your response my post of (20/Dec/2007 at 4:27PM) on the “Cultural Theft” thread is no doubt true. But why don’t we just cut to the chase, and that is: Have either of you, or anyone else out there actually seen the movie “Zeitgeist” yet, and if so? Why hasn’t anyone commented on it? Could it be that all of you are actually afraid of the truth? http://zeitgeistmovie.com/ Anyway, if you would like to eliminate me, for being the barer of bad news, that’s ok with me. (As long as you do it by crucifixion)! You know what they say. Misery loves company. JC |
| Posted by: Swanny 16-Jan-2008, 10:02 AM |
| Straight up, John. I haven't seen the movie, and can't afford to spend two hours (plus download time) to do so. Can you provide us those of us with busy lives a synopsis so we can judge whether or not it is something we should spend time on? Heck, I haven't seen a movie or for that matter, spent more than half an hour in front of the TV at one time in the past 3 months. Swanny |
| Posted by: stoirmeil 16-Jan-2008, 10:13 AM |
| Here's a typical review, and the link: http://www.boingboing.net/2007/08/06/jay-kinney-reviews-z.html In three parts, Zeitgeist (which has no credits) attempts to show that 1) Christianity is rehashed pagan sun-worship and is used by the rich and powerful to control people, 2) the 9/11 tragedies were part of an elite conspiracy, and 3) ever since World War I, the ultra-rich have been secretly manufacturing wars and financial collapses to control the populace and to get richer and more powerful. I don't know enough about politics, history, or religion to have a valid opinion of Zeitgeist, but I was interested in getting a well-informed person's assessment of the documentary. I could think of no one better suited than Jay Kinney. He was the publisher of the late, great Gnosis Magazine, the author of several books on Western esoteric and occult traditions, and the author of The Masonic Enigma, "a journey of discovery into the real facts (and mysteries) of Masonry's history and symbols." He's also an amazingly talented cartoonist, and contributed to The Whole Earth Review which is how I first learned about him. (His 1987 article, "If Software Companies Ran the Country," where he compares Al Capp's Shmoos to infinitely-copyable software, remains as fresh and powerful today as it did 20 years ago). At my request, Jay watched the movie, and kindly wrote the following review for Boing Boing: Zeiting the Geist The latest bit of guerrilla media to take the online universe by storm is “Zeitgeist, the Movie.” Clocking in at close to two hours’ length, and with over a million views on Google Video since its June 26th “official” release, Zeitgeist is a grabby, cranky, can’t-stop-watching-it documentary that purports to tell the real truth about Christianity, 9/11, and the International Bankers. Exactly who is behind the video is unclear, although someone with the moniker of “Peter J.” has posted an online letter claiming credit and explaining Zeitgeist’s message to those who may have somehow failed to grasp the worldview that the video hammers home. And what is that worldview, pray tell? Religions in general, and Christianity in particular, are primarily systems of social control. 9/11 was an inside job and the destruction of the WTC twin towers and building 7 were aided by controlled demolition. And finally, International Bankers, through the Federal Reserve and the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), control our money and our future, leading to, ta da, the coming One World Government and the microchipping of everyone. Exactly how all this fits together is left to the viewer’s imagination or, presumably, the film-maker’s hash pipe. Are those who manipulate Christianity for control purposes in cahoots with the Bankers, and were the Bankers in on the 9/11 caper? Zeitgeist sidesteps such logical questions through the use of the all-purpose term, “the elite,” a shadowy group of rich and powerful men who want nothing more than to enslave humanity and reap block-buster profits through the promotion of wars and financial crises. For conspiracy buffs, this is all pretty standard fare, and, indeed, aficionados of the genre will find little new in “Zeitgeist.” The notions that most religions were originally a kind of solar worship, and that the Jesus Christ story recapitulated the mythos of numerous other “dying gods,” were floating around in the late 1700s. Fittingly, the video features a quote from Thomas Paine reducing Christianity to warmed-over sun worship, which was a daring bit of religion-baiting 200 years ago, albeit not so earth-shattering today. The nefarious International Bankers meme has been propagating itself since at least the mid-1800s and has long been a mainstay of radical right-wing circles where it has often overlapped with mutterings about Jewish cabals. The 9/11 truth segment of the video is, of course, of much more recent vintage, but, here too, it mostly repeats accusations that have gotten widespread play in the uber-skeptic milieu. Breaking new factual ground is not what Zeitgeist is about, however. Rather, the video is a powerful and fast-acting dose of agitprop, hawking its conclusions as givens. Unfortunately, like most propaganda, it doesn’t play fair with its intended audience. At times, while watching it, I felt like I was getting Malcolm McDowell’s treatment in Clockwork Orange: eyes pried wide open while getting bombarded with quick-cut atrocity photos. At other times, Zeitgeist engages in willful confusion by showing TV screen shots of network or cable news with voice-overs from unidentified people not associated with the news programs. If one weren’t paying close attention, the effect would be to confer the status and authority of TV news upon the words being spoken. Even when quotes or sound bites are attributed to a source, there’s no way to tell if they are quoted correctly or in context. Late in the video, there’s a supposed quote from David Rockefeller, which, if genuine, would be an astounding confession of complicity in mass manipulation. But, of course, the quote is not sourced or dated, which renders it useless. (The video’s website does feature a Sources page, but a hodge-podge list of books, with no page numbers cited, is of little value for source verification.) The over-all temper of the video is rather like the John Birch Society on acid, with interludes by Harry Smith. Incongruously, after spending nearly two hours trying to scare the bejeezis out of its viewers, Zeitgeist ends on an oddly upbeat note, telling us that Love — not Fear — is the answer, We are all One, and featuring sound-bites from Ram Dass and Carl Sagan. It’s a shame, really, that Zeitgeist is, ultimately, such a mess. There are plenty of legitimate questions about what transpired on 9/11, just as there are plenty of shady doings in international finance or puzzling aspects of religious history, for that matter. And what is coming down in the name of National Security is truly unnerving. Yet, bundling them all together in disjointed fashion does justice to none of them. Time and again, Zeitgeist maximizes emotional impact at the expense of a more reasoned weighing of evidence. But, perhaps that’s the intention. I’ve often pondered about what it might take to snap everyone out of the walking dream we collectively entered on 9/11/01. Just as the fall of the Berlin Wall provided the emotional pivot for the end of the Cold War, only a collective experience of an intensity equal to that of 9/11 might jolt us awake as to what is really happening in the corridors of power and certain undisclosed locations. It’s my hunch that Zeitgeist is one attempt to provide such a jolt, and it does indeed pack a certain punch. Too bad it also runs off in three directions at once, and is so indiscriminate in its sources and overly certain of its conclusions. Zeitgeist may be powerful, but its power is tainted with some simplistic and pernicious memes that have already received more propagation than they deserve. The video’s producer does inform us that “It is my hope that people will not take what is said in the film as the truth . . .” Indeed. |
| Posted by: Dogshirt 16-Jan-2008, 08:36 PM |
Sounds like I could spend 2 hours cleaning in my dog yards and get a wheelbarrow of the stuff. |
| Posted by: Sekhmet 16-Jan-2008, 10:40 PM |
| Ok...so...what the frell does that have to do with cultural theft? Just curious. I mean, I've got my own views on it, and I know what my clan mothers have taught me, but um...hey, I love a good conspiracy theory. |
| Posted by: John Clements 16-Jan-2008, 11:14 PM | ||
Hi Swanny, sorry you’re so busy, and yes stoirmeil posted a commentary about the movie, although I give the commentary just about as much credence as he gave the movie! Wow stoirmeil, Jay Kinney’s commentary is almost as long as the movie itself, and it sound to me that his main problem with the movie Zeitgeist, is, that it bit off more then he could chew. But that wouldn’t be me, because I can still multi task, even though I'm in my sixty’s. So let me ask both you, and Dogshirt, (that is if he isn’t to busy picking up after his dog)! Have either of you seen the movie? If not, then you can’t really talk about it can you? http://zeitgeistmovie.com/ |
| Posted by: Dogshirt 17-Jan-2008, 01:06 AM |
| Perhaps not, but it IS my time and I choose what to do with it. And wasting it on crap like this is no it! |
| Posted by: thecelticgiraffe 17-Jan-2008, 06:29 AM |
| Cultural Theft is really just when someone is a "wannabe" because they admire a particular culture. They try to do things that culture does or wear the styles they wear, etc., even though they are not part of that culture, but simply like it and want to act like they are a part of it. "Cultural Theft" seems to be used mostly within the context of Native American "wannabes". But it can apply to any cultural "wannabe". Loads of profit are being made by giving into the desires of a lot of "wannabes". Witness the selling of supposed "traditional" Native American products or Irish products, so that those who buy can feel they are part of the culture. Many people actually get carried away literally trying their best to prove they have certain blood lines which they don't. Any hint that they may have the blood line of a certain culture and right away they are celebrating new holidays, buying traditional clothing, eating the food, etc. as if they grew up in that culture! Luckily this usually fades away and they eventually return to normal (or not). It is a good thing to enjoy another culture and maybe participate in some of the things they do as an educated observer. This is how you build strong human relations with other cultures and also learn how they think, as well as have fun. But to get carried way into thinking you are one of them and attempting to prove the dream a reality, is trying to steal an identity that you are not. |
| Posted by: John Clements 17-Jan-2008, 08:50 AM | ||
If you had seen the movie and decided that it was “crap”, (as you put it)! Then your opinion would expectable, but until you have seen the movie. Your opinion is just that…crap! http://zeitgeistmovie.com/ |
| Posted by: John Clements 17-Jan-2008, 09:03 AM | ||
I agree with you definition of Cultural Theft, but doesn’t religion play a big part in ones culture? And if so, wouldn’t plagiarizing the greatest story ever told, from another culture, constitute theft? |
| Posted by: oldraven 17-Jan-2008, 11:38 AM |
| Well, not really. The ideologies weren't stolen. In fact, this film claims that the people were already living by these ideologies (The Hebrews would no doubt have picked up a lot of the beliefs of current Egypt while enslaved). Moses was raised as an Egyptian, so that really was his culture. The claim here is that they took their beliefs and personalised or humanised them, then surrounded these characters with stories outlining doctrines. That's not theft. It's retelling a story in a new genre. |
| Posted by: Sekhmet 17-Jan-2008, 01:40 PM |
| I'm going to remind all involved in this conversation (or lurking and reading it), that this is to remain civil and polite. This isn't the politics forum, gang. Put the gloves back on or transfer the conversation over to the proper forum. |
| Posted by: Antwn 17-Jan-2008, 02:04 PM |
| First you're never going to stop cultural intermingling or even plagerism. The only way you will is to isolate every culture completely. So long as you have close cultural interaction you're going to have mixing of cultures. Indeed, new cultural expressions are often born from just this kind of interaction. Flamenco music mixes elements of Arabic, Gypsy, Jewish musical expressions to create a unique form which now has a 500 year tradition for example. Even the language we're using to talk about this mixes Germanic, Latin, Greek, French and according to some of the latest linguistic theory Semitic influence. Of course this isn't the same as the rip offs that Swanny is talking about, where new age white people make a quick buck off a smattering of exposure to native religions and claiming authenticity because a 2nd cousin once removed's great grandmother was 1/124th Cherokee. Is there such a thing as cultural theft, sure. When is plagerism the sincerest form of flattery and when is it exploitation? Perhaps the answer lies in the intent. |
| Posted by: Sekhmet 17-Jan-2008, 02:09 PM |
| The bottom line is, all cultures borrow from others with which they have come in contact. That's human nature. That is people having a drive and need for novelty and innovation. And some cultures exert such an influence over another that they "flip" the other. This bleeds into the language, religion, material culture, the whole nine yards. It's the way of the world, and it's far from anything new. Cultural "theft" comes when this exertion is observed by the originating culture, and is resented. Key word there is *resented*. When only certain, appealing aspects of ceremony, tradition, dress, etc. is taken and the rest left behind, it is "bastardized". It is a "ripoff". It is viewed as shallow. And they have a legitimate gripe, frankly, particularly when someone presents a concept and portions of another culture for profit, not for teaching or others' enrichment. But it's not going to stop it. And many positive things can come from it. I've seen this in more places than I care to think about. In the bellydancing community, this is rabid. In the Celtic communities, it's everywhere. In the Pagan communities, this comes up quite often. Ditto Native American. My clan mother taught me that we do not give the ceremonies and traditions over lightly, and not to the unworthy. When one takes just the aspects that the person likes and fills it in with what they feel *should* be in there instead, then it's irrevocably changed. And if they are quizzed about where they got these newfangled ideas and ceremonies, they point back to those who originally taught them something completely different by this point. Now not only are this person's teachings brought into question, but those who taught him. That said, there are forever changes to a culture, much of which is totally unintentional. Someone forgets one part and thinks it might be this, so they roll with it. Those not knowing any better pick it up and pass it on. And on and on. It's the way of humans and the way of the world. Ok, off the soap box for me. Y'all behave, got me?  |
| Posted by: stoirmeil 17-Jan-2008, 02:21 PM |
| OK. Sekhmet is right. I seem to have gotten my friend JC riled by posting that review, so let me try to get it right. Posting this particular review was just an attempt to get at some detail as to content, in response to Swanny's request; there were several like it. I have tried to open the link to the actual film and failed, so I did want to see the thing itself. I'm assuming that the relevant part for the cultural theft idea is the Akh-en-aton monotheism that prefigured Judaism. This is not news -- I heard about it as an undergrad in the late sixties, and one of the sources was Moses and Monotheism (Freud), writen well before 1940. Imitation is not cultural theft -- cultures can't be stolen, but behaviors can be and often are copied and then modifed to make sense in their new settings. Cultural plagiarism is possible, I think -- if you lift certain elements of a complex cultural expression without considering how the whole thing works, and then claim it as original. But since the same human tropes get interpreted over and over and modified for culture after culture, it's hardly feasible that real plagiarism would go undetected. I do agree that anything that claims to be original, and the one and only path, is suspicious. |
| Posted by: John Clements 17-Jan-2008, 02:37 PM | ||
Now that may well be true, and I’m not a lawyer, but having seen the movie. It appears to me that the Egyptians have a strong “Copy Right” infringement case! So let me ask again. Have you seen the movie? Until then I rest my case. Hey! How about this? You’re all invited to come to my house, and I’ll run the “Flick” for you. I’ll even throw in some refreshments, but then don’t expect me to pick up your air fair. Sorry about this guys I just can’t help the justice Pit-bull in me. |
| Posted by: Antwn 18-Jan-2008, 04:14 PM |
| OK OK I WATCHED THE MOVIE!!!!! 98% of it at least, until it got too tedious. Nothing in it is new to me, the part about Christianity being a rehash of previous beliefs is taken straight from "The Christ Conspiracy - The Greatest Story Ever Sold" by Acharya S, who provides a heck of alot more source material. I have to agree in part with the review Stoirmeil posted by saying the claims are unsubstantiated and the film itself expects you to take every one at face value. If they had made 3 films - one for each subject - and provided sources for their claims like any bona fide scholar or researcher would, then it might be more useful. In a film which talks about origins of Christianity, 9/11 as an inside job and the world being governed by an closeted clique of super rich bankers clearly bites off more than what's chewable in a 2 hour overview. If the point is to somehow connect the dots - as if the Christian religion, a banking oligarchy and 9/11 are part of one grandiose scheme of control and subjugation, then the incredulity meter skyrockets into the red zone for me. The whole thing may be absolutely true for all I know, and JC may be Morpheus asking if I want the red pill, but are we really expected to be gullible enough to believe all these claims based on this film? More trivial subject matter than this is subject to higher standards of substantiation. As far as I could see, this film doesn't avail itself of any. Makes a good story though. Any novelists out there in search of a plot line? |
| Posted by: Sekhmet 18-Jan-2008, 05:58 PM |
| Yes there's novelists out here, and no, I'm not touching that sucker with a ten foot pole. Rob Brown would have a field day though. Heh. |
| Posted by: Shadows 18-Jan-2008, 06:15 PM |
| When I first posted this topic my intent was to open the door to discussion about the "percieved theft" of "culture" and "religion" by those of "different" backgrounds then those percieved being "stolen" from. Imitation can be the highest form of flattery if done with decorum and respect... I my humble opinion every culture and religion has borrowed from the one's that preceed and this melding of ideas and philosophy is what has kept us as humans growing and going for the centuries we have existed. I do not tout any one belief over another, nor do I expect everyone to understand my eclectic choices. I respect the choices of others and respect the "source" of any I have incorporated in my lifes journey. I only hope everyone will one day awaken to "truth" that fits their lives and live by that truth. |
| Posted by: Dogshirt 18-Jan-2008, 08:49 PM | ||
I VERY much like the word "Truth" without the addition of the word "The"! Too many people would have the rest of us belive that THEIR truth is THE truth. As Black Elk said "Where ever you are is the center of the Universe." But it is not the center of MY universe! |
| Posted by: Shadows 19-Jan-2008, 07:23 AM | ||
Black Elk said a lot of things that make sense! |
| Posted by: stoirmeil 21-Jan-2008, 12:54 PM | ||
 That's it! I'm gonna go visit him and see the film -- he's not that far from me. I think there is something else going on too, in addition to the line of imitation being the highest form of flattery. I think for something to be imitated or incorporated, it has to be of some practical use or make some kind of good fit, according to the needs of the people considering it. So first, why does a culture pick up something so loaded as an external belief system with a code of ethics and a vision of what is beyond mortal existence, and then why do they modify it the way they do? I know that's standing back and taking distance, and for people who see a treasured system being appropriated in an unthinking way that brings it down, it's hard. But at least some motivations for taking on an outside belief, or some powerful feature of it, must be genuine, so the question is: who took what, and what did it serve them? |
| Posted by: John Clements 31-Jan-2008, 02:30 PM | ||
Let me make it perfectly clear. I’m not recommending that you see Zeitgeist (the movie) because it proves that the Greatest Story Ever Told was in fact an Egyptian story. I’m suggesting that you see it because the story just isn’t true. Storoirmeil, since you were just kidding when you maid the above statement, (unbeknownst to me and everyone else), why don’t you email me your address, and I’ll send you a DVD of the movie, providing that you don’t keep it too long, and you foot the bill to send it back to me. I can’t make it any easier then that, can I? http://zeitgeistmovie.com/ |