Appropriator

An appropriator is an individual or entity that takes something, often resources, for their own use, sometimes without permission or right, or for a specific purpose. This can range from financial resources to artistic creations to cultural elements. The implication often involves a transfer or taking, and sometimes a misuse or improper application of the appropriated item. This can be legal or illegal depending on the context and the existence of rights. Understanding the motives and consequences of appropriation is crucial in evaluating the actions of an appropriator.

Appropriator meaning with examples

• The venture capitalist was accused of being a skilled appropriator, acquiring promising start-ups at low valuations before flipping them for massive profits. Critics argued that this benefited only the appropriator, squeezing out opportunities for innovation. He leveraged loopholes and market fluctuations effectively, becoming a well-known figure. His tactics stirred ethical debates within the business world.
• After the successful harvest, the local lord became the primary appropriator of the village's grain, leaving little for the farmers themselves. This practice, deeply rooted in feudal traditions, fostered resentment. The lord’s actions led to widespread complaints. The system clearly demonstrated the power imbalance in the local society. The appropriator prioritized his own needs over the prosperity of the village.
• During the art exhibit, the gallery owner was seen as an appropriator when they removed pieces from various artists and claimed them as their own, claiming it was part of their personal collection. This act was seen as the theft of intellectual property. The accusations had severe repercussions, leading to loss of clients. The appropriator's actions caused a scandal. The artists affected took legal action. The appropriated artwork was considered invaluable.
• The government, acting as an appropriator, seized private land to build a new highway, offering compensation to the landowners. While the action was deemed necessary for public good, it still triggered intense debates. Landowners fought over the compensation offered by the appropriator. Questions about the fairness and adequacy of the reimbursement fueled disputes between individuals and the state.