• TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Gonna play a game of comment roulette. How far do I have to scroll before I see someone say something like, “That can’t be in their museum because they can’t be trusted with it”.

    Spinning the chamber now.

    Edit: turns out I wasn’t prepared for what I saw. Now I sad.

  • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    2 months ago

    Marion, this is a movie made in the 1980s and set in the 1930s, what the hell are you even talking about?

    • Anomalocaris@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      That attitude gets retconed in the great circle.

      where he explicitly says that it belongs in a museum and helps locals get their relics to keep safe in their museums. ie, it belongs in their museums.

      good game overall

      • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Marion, you knew when you met me that I came from the mind of George Lucas. It’s not my fault I’m a little fucked up!

  • Anomalocaris@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    2 months ago

    i need someone to convince me why it is wrong to steal from the British museum gift shop

    • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Will you display for free all your stolen giftshop loot for everyone to see, and promise never to damage it, sell it or dispose of it in any way.

      • Anomalocaris@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        I’ll showcase it to people I allow on my house, and say I take care of it, but what if I put then in ebay? who is going to stop me

        • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          If you are comparing stealing from the giftshop to the museum’s procurement process then you have to display your loot in an equal (free) manner to all members of the public, and refuse sell any items.

          • Anomalocaris@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Is it free to the public?

            People in Africa/asia, have to get a visa, and spend thousands (if they manage to be super cheap might only be a few hundred) of pounds to see their own historical artifacts, and keep in mind most of the artifacts are not in display, and it is the British curators who decide what is displayed, and what will likely end up in ebay.

            IE: my metaphor is correct

            but I’ll tell everyone I’m more responsible than those brown/people and that’s why I get to keep them

            • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              You don’t have to pay for people’s transport if they come to see your giftshop loot, but you do have to show it them for free.

              No. Selling on eBay is not allowed. In fact, once you have started your collection you are expected to pay for all future additions to your collection (although you may get donations).

              Your shoplifting metaphor ignored the curation, storage and display responsibilities. It also assumed resale which, in the British Museum’s case, hasn’t occurred.

              • Anomalocaris@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                2 months ago

                I still get to control who gets in (visa)

                i see the problem, you’re assuming I’m the British museum in the metaphor, but I’m more like the UK in the metaphor.

                And there are plenty of artifacts from the museum that ended up in ebay, but don’t worry, the museum promised they will investigate themselves whenever it happens.

                Why is a foreign entity, gets to decide what to do with stolen artifacts?

                could I rob a bank, and when they catch me I can blame the bank for low security,.and not have to return anything because I will allow some people to come to my house and show them some bank stationary I also stole? while keeping the money for myself and do with it as I please. while pinky promising to not use the money I stole, but there’s no oversight or consequences if I don’t.

                • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  I still get to control who gets in (visa)

                  You don’t control country visas. Neither does the British Museum.

                  i see the problem, you’re assuming I’m the British museum in the metaphor, but I’m more like the UK in the metaphor.

                  Ah OK. Then I’m confused what the “UK giftshop” represents, and also what are you stealing from it.

                  Why is a foreign entity, gets to decide what to do with stolen artifacts?

                  A good, but different question. We are straying from the question of being morally able to steal from the British Museum giftshop.

                  could I rob a bank, and when they catch me I can blame the bank for low security,.and not have to return anything because I will allow some people to come to my house and show them some bank stationary I also stole?

                  The standard response is that you are a white hat bank robber, and you will return the bank assets once they beef up security. But the Greek bank has done this and still doesn’t have it’s assets back.

  • greenskye@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    What’s the opinion on certain high risk countries where there’s a high likelihood of the artifacts simply being destroyed? If I remember correctly ISIS and other similar organizations have burned or bombed several historical sites before.

    • ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      45
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Museums should participate in cultural exchange, if a museum feels under threat then they have channels they can trust to protect their artifacts until they can be returned

      • merc@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        if a museum feels under threat

        If you run a museum in Afghanistan and are afraid that the Taliban is going to execute you unless you destroy some blasphemous statue, are you going to risk your life to send the artifact to the British Museum, or are you just going to destroy it? Yeah, some heroes will definitely risk their lives, but most won’t.

    • But_my_mom_says_im_cool@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      The only opinion that should matter is that of the people the artifacts belong to.

      “It’s safer with us” is an excuse that’s been abused by colonizers and raiders for too long.

      • KittyCat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        In many cases there is no owner, they’re from a completely separate culture that happened to occupy the same region in the past.

      • greenskye@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        What if some of the locals want it taken away for protection, but the government wants it destroyed?

        There’s no clear ‘owner’ in many cases. I think it places where it’s uncertain, then we should prioritize saving the artifacts over the ones that seek to destroy them.

        • pugnaciousfarter@literature.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          You will never be able to get everyone to agree on anything and you can’t hold a referendum for every artifact.

          So as far as responsibility goes, barring edge cases, it should be left upto the government to decide, as they represent the people.

          And tbh, this feels like an argument made in bad faith, because this is such a rare case. No government is going to ask for an artifact back and then destroy it. What happened in afganistan and Syria was a tragedy (they didn’t ask for those artifacts back, they were already there) But that only happened because the previous governments had been destabilized by Russian and American influences. (Iraq war - Isis, Afganistan war - alqaeda)

          There’s no clear ‘owner’ in many cases.

          Just return it to the country where it was taken from. And I don’t think there are many cases where ownership is vague, most are pretty plain and clear.

          then we should prioritize saving the artifacts over the ones that seek to destroy them.

          That’s not on you, that’s on their original keepers. Otherwise you are propagating colonial era crimes and justifying them by arguing in bad faith.

          P.s.

          • Museums have a notorious record when it comes to maintaining artifacts (they aren’t shining beacons of humanity), especially the British museum.
          • They also do less than what’s needed to discourage artifact smuggling.
          • watch: https://youtu.be/eJPLiT1kCSM
      • merc@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        The only opinion that should matter is that of the people the artifacts belong to.

        Which people? The government? So in Afghanistan it’s up to the Taliban? If you don’t trust that the government of a country represents the will of the people, then how do you determine what the people want?

        And, again, which people? Is a totem pole in a museum in Canada the property of the Canadian people? Or is it something that belongs to the Haida people, and it doesn’t matter what other Canadians want? If it is up to the Haida, it is up to the Council of the Haida Nation, or is it up to the band the original artist belonged to?

        What about a Tatar artifact found in Donetsk? Who gets control over that? Is it the Russians since they occupy Donetsk? The Ukrainians because they used to occupy it? Do you have to study the blood of various Ukrainian people to figure out who has the most surviving Tatar DNA?

        • 0x0@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          If you don’t trust that the government of a country represents the will of the people, then how do you determine what the people want?

          You mean most governments?

    • Kühlschrank@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      2 months ago

      We have to be extremely wary of people who cite that because it’s so easily used as a justification for artifact theft and can have deep roots in racism.

      • nexguy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        2 months ago

        That’s the question. Where is the line between racism and artifact protection?

        • lath@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          22
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          2 months ago

          Presumably somewhere between racism and artifact protection.

  • 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 🇮 @pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    It should belong to the country of origin, but it could also be shared and tour around museums across the globe so an even greater number of people can check it out. They do this with art pieces. Why not cultural artifacts, too? Is not everyone entitled to learning about anything, including someone else’s culture?

    • odelik@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Fun fact: Many cultural artificats do go on tour!

      For example I’ve seen both Pompeii & King Tutt exhibits in San Diego that have since rotated. I’ve also seen other traveling exhibits in several other major cities I’ve lived in that were far more than art.

      Many cities also have free admission days to museums for people that live nearby (depends on the institution but it could be for City/County/State).

      With this knowledge, you too, can now learn and explore societies that predate written word.

    • Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      I would assume there would be arguments around transporting them increasing the chances of it breaking. It would really only make sense to move these back to their country of origin and have them remain there to minimize potential points of failure. The rarer the artifact itself (another rusted out sword or plain clay cup versus a one of a kind manuscript whose pages have become incredibly delicate) the less their respective owners are going to want it to be moved.

      Instead, we should be allowing more people the ability to travel and take time to go explore other cultures in their country of origin instead of trying to transport priceless artifacts across the globe.

  • Troy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    2 months ago

    Countries and borders are an arbitrary concept created during the peace treaty of Westphalia.

    Those relics belong to dead people.

    • iegod@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      I think I get the gist of what you’re saying but they’re very much not arbitrary. They’re a direct manifestation of a state’s ability to exert control.

      • Troy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        We agree entirely.

        Without the ability to exert control and therefore reinforce the definition, borders are as arbitrary as any other law. They are created by people, enforced by people, and if we change our mind then they can go away. It’s not some intrinsic property of the planet.

        While I’m ranting, the definition of a relic or artifact is equally arbitrary. As well as the definition of a people. And ownership. At any point in history, these definitions will be different. Right now we’ve defined it in such a way that we’ve decided that it is socially acceptable to return relics to people who live inside geographic areas where the relics originated from. This is also arbitrary.

        But as long as people, decide to exert force to reinforce this definitions, there is true as any other law.

    • pugnaciousfarter@literature.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Those relics belong to dead people.

      No, it belongs to a community. Does something stop belonging to a people if the original creators die? No.

      That way nobody owns any land, because it belongs to the amoeba.

      Returning the artifacts is meant to be a good will gesture, and a sort of a reparation (in lieu of the actual reparations) for all the horrible colonial era crimes that were propagated not more than even 100 years ago.

    • TimewornTraveler@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Attributing modern concepts of borders to Westphalia is a Eurocentric worldview. What, you don’t think they had the concept of statehood and sovereignty in Asia for at least a few thousand years prior to this?

    • ProvableGecko@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Countries and borders are an arbitrary concept created during the peace treaty of Westphalia.

      Stealing this foolproof argument for when I next apply for a UK visa to go to British Museum. Thanks!

      • Troy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        When I was in grad school, the philosophy of science students would egg me on with things like: “I’ll buy you a beer if you can prove the electron is real”. I’d like to think I’m carrying on their tradition in science memes.

    • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Yeah, it’s definitely a little questionable when the people currently inhabiting the land have no direct connection to the people who made the artifacts. And then you got shit like this. Or this. Or this.

      • ebolapie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Hot take: all artifacts should be located in the most geopolitically stable area possible

        Hotter take: un peacekeepers should protect world heritage sites with weapons-free orders

        • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          As an American, we should be shipping our arts out of the country before the current regime decides it’s subversive to the regime and burn it. Especially any art made by minorities, opposition or in places that might get bombed(any coastal city).

          • pugnaciousfarter@literature.cafe
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            And that would be for the Individual Americans to decide, or the institutions.

            It wouldn’t have been plundered.

            You are assuming that the artifacts such as those held in the British museum solely represent “saving culture” but they also represent the lingering colonial mindset. They weren’t taken away to preserve, they were taken as plunder. LITERALLY.

            https://youtu.be/eJPLiT1kCSM

            6:40 <- mark, watch the whole thing if you have the time.

            Imagine if Nigeria and other african countries invaded your country, forced you into indentured servitude, spread propoganda and took all the art/artifacts to their country and used the excuse that your president is a fascist douche turd and because of that none of you are worthy enough to handle it. You just can’t be trusted with your own art and then never returned it even after things got objectively better.

  • muhyb@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    145
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    -Why there are pyramids in Egypt?

    -Because Brits couldn’t moved them to British Museum.

    • damdy@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      To be fair. Most of the pyramids were raided far before the British took an interest and whatever they held has now been lost to time.

  • Surenho@lemmy.wtf
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    The museum could pay rent per item to the country the artifacts originate from? Bad idea?

  • lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    2 months ago

    Many ethnic minorities complain that their cultural heritage is exhibitioned in the capital far away. Countries are a social construct

    • pugnaciousfarter@literature.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      So it’s better to keep it somewhere thousands of kilometres away where they’ll never be able to see it as compared to being able to see it albeit with difficulty?

      That’s an internal problem for them to solve, not an excuse to hoard someone else’s culture.

      • lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        I never said it’s better to keep it but it’s not enough to bring it somewhere in the country. Countries are a social construct so instead of focusing on boarders, bring it directly to the cultural heirs. Of cause keeping it is worse. If the capital is too far away, why would London be better?

        • pugnaciousfarter@literature.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          Of cause keeping it is worse. If the capital is too far away, why would London be better?

          Exactly. We agree there then.

          Countries are a social construct so instead of focusing on boarders, bring it directly to the cultural heirs.

          I think this tricky. Usually, I think the Cultural heritage belongs to the countries from where the artifacts were taken, so that’s where the artifacts should be returned to. Otherwise, How do you decide who to give an artifact to? Most inhabitants of central America share Mayan ancestry, and they no longer follow the maya religion.

          I guess it’s a case to case basis. I am sure the rare cases in which there is a dispute it should be left upto the countries or institutions that claim the artifact to arbitrate.

    • Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      This is why I always donate my finished books to my local library. I don’t need them and, if I want to read them again, I can always just go check it out from the library.