Color-Blind Ideology And The Cultural Appropriation Of Hip-Hop

Cultural appropriation is commonly misused and misunderstood as cultural misappropriation, where elements of a culture are taken for means of ridiculing. Cultural appropriation has racial implications that are interpreted as inappropriate. Some equate cultural appropriation with stealing because the culture being appropriated is often distorted and corrupt resulting in the culture being seen as inferior. While that may be true is some cases, if someone who borrows elements from another culture is mindful of its significance, then appropriation can potentially be progressive. Cultures can have to ability to learn from one another, contributing to the progress of the world. This issue is continuously seen in the music industry. The most recent

Rodriquez claims that by asserting that there is equality across cultures masks that there is not equality. Although that may be the true in some cases, the white hip-hop artist Macklemore addresses the inequality in his music and therefore does not use color-blind ideology. In Macklemore’s 2016 hit “White Privilege II”, he discusses social justice, Black Lives Matter, and most obviously white privilege. Macklemore’s song directly goes against Rodriquez’s argument that people use color-blind ideology (Rodriquez, 2006). Macklemore actively acknowledges that the problem exists. He strategically uses his popularity as a platform to speak for those cultures that have been misappropriated. Therefore, his messages about inequality are spread to his fans who also do not rely on color-blind ideology. Macklemore’s activity in this social issue is not limited to this one song. He participates in Black Lives Matter protests, speaks about inequality in interviews, and has multiple songs addressing inequality. Macklemore isn’t the only white artist to be politically active. While it is true that some people use color-blind ideology as an excuse to culturally misappropriate, Rodriquez fails to acknowledge that many other people are open to recognizing the inequality across cultures. Rodriquez also argues

However, in the act of stealing, someone gains something and another loses it. In the case of cultural appropriation, nobody is losing anything. More properly, cultural appropriation is not stealing, but rather using. This idea of using rather than stealing is broader than the scope of hip-hop music. The ancient Greeks developed the democratic system, but then much later, many countries saw the benefits of democracy and started to adapt this system of governing. Technological companies such as Apple and Samsung feed off of each other’s ideas leading to the advancement of technology. Different communities adopt other communities’ agricultural techniques for their benefit. All of these examples exhibit a compound growth effect where others adopt an idea and build off of it. With the compound growth effect in play, ideas a constantly progressing. This essentially boils down to the sharing of ideas. In the scope of hip-hop music, simply having a single different perspective of hip-hop can contribute to the growth of hip-hop. And by having an entire other culture that is not African-American adopt hip-hop, the progress of hip-hop is immediately exponentiated. This idea of cultural appropriation has been seen before and has incredibly progressive. This most obvious example lies in African-American blues