I wonder how those who believe that only someone of a certain nationality/race/ethnicity/culture(and even that is dependent on the individual, as Suibhne Astray said, e.g. someone born in France, for example, or Australia (my home country) or Trinidad or Jamaica to foreign-born European parents is no less French, Australian, Trinidadian, Jamaican or Japanese or wherever country than someone whose parents have never left the country) would react when faced with a performer, born and raised in their home country who was immersed in another culture/ethnicity's musical tradition and respected and thought of as authentic performer by native-born performers (those qualified to judge). I highly doubt (apologies if I'm wrong) that the OP has ever met a Black calypsonian or a reggae artist or Blues artist for more than a few minutes, or asked them whether they would think that a foreign-born performer immersed in their culture and tradition, who was not exploitative and who was respected as an authentic performer within that country should not perform that tradition? Even if they are respected as a performer by native-born performers? Who is qualified to judge who is authentic except respected native-born performers?