Why would they be considered 'appropriating' it? And why the focus on fashion?

They are playing the music and (seemingly) living the lifestyle and politics; wouldn't they qualify as punks the same as someone doing this in NYC or Minot?

I think they are part of worldwide culture of punk, not appropriating it or borrowing tactics. But actually being it in their own way. Which is the ethos of punk.

So, as Lenin once said: "kto, kogo" its all about who is doing it to whom, not what is being done.

FTA: "A few days after the concert, Kyaw Kyaw is at home. Wearing a Ramones T-shirt and tight jeans, he is sitting on a battered plastic chair in the room he shares with his parents and two siblings."

from wikipedia on Johnny Ramone

"Johnny was known within the punk rock community as one of its notable conservatives, and was a staunch supporter of the Republican Party. Johnny made his political affiliation known to the world in 2002, when the Ramones were inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame."

I love this blog, but often I find the blog posts on cultural appropriation a bit too evaluative. Music and culture are fluid and can be appropriated by everybody, everywhere, to express similar values as the original context culture of the 'style' (in this case), or other, often local sentiments. I think that's awesome.
Of course the story changes if the original context culture is misrepresented, and the appropriation causes confusion or is only superficial (such as the appropriation of Native American culture, or hip hop culture, for instance). Still, even if it might offend some people, I don't think you can stop appropriation from happening. Culture is not something static, and it will die if you try to keep it from moving to other places and people in the world, even if these will only take a few elements of their liking.

To make my point: I don't think this particular case is 'good'. I sense an undertone of these Burmese youngsters as a disadvantaged group, and the fact that because this group is disadvantaged, it's somehow okay that the take over culture. What if these youngsters took over hip hop culture? And what if they were rich Burmese youngsters taking over hip hop culture?
I think these trends can both be evaluated as awesome (as I personally do) or as cultural transformation that is not doing right to the origins of the particular culture. I feel in much writing, this evaluation is based on the power that these groups have: if the appropriated culture is of a 'powerless' group, being taken over by the hegemony, it's wrong. If it's the other way around, it's the best thing ever.

I don't know, I'm probably missing a big point here. So feel free to point to my wrong argumentation ;)

I would suggest the use of cultural hybridity or glocalization as opposed to cultural appropriation. What is occurring is an acceptance of a global subculture and the redefining, and hybridizing, to their particular social context. It almost seems like it is re-enchanting of the subculture that has been disenchanted in Western society through commodification, that has completely removed the political/rebellious nature from the subculture.

Can we not list feminism and queer rights as being separate, as though they are not themselves (among other things) civil rights movements? If you mean that they've used tactics pioneered in anti-racism work, that's fine--but say that.

They're doing punk.......in freakin' BURMA!! This article is spot on. Enough with the semantic bs in the comments section.

Like the rule of comedy to "punch up, not down"-- that is, if your jokes attack a marginalized group, that's not okay, but if they attack a system or group in power, that's okay-- it seems like "steal up, not down" could work pretty well too. It's OK to take the trappings of someone's culture or subculture if that culture or subculture is in a position of power or authority, because there's no way that by doing that you can be contributing to that group's marginalization (since they aren't marginalized). But taking the trappings of a culture that is marginalized ends up marginalizing them further both by reducing them to whatever it is that you're taking.

This isn't cultural appropriation; it's assimilation to the colonizer cultures.

Whites appropriate. It's part of white supremacy imperialism. Nice try, though.

It looks funny to people who grew up with Punk. Atleast they're having fun with it ?