[Marxism] If only....
sartesian at earthlink.net
Fri Nov 12 09:56:43 MST 2010
Except how did the Taliban come to power, for one? Through the same
imperialists that "protect" artifacts, no?
And neither the current Egyptian government, nor that of Greece, nor that of
Iraq before the invasion has assaulted the artifacts of their own history in
the name of religious fundamentalism.
I actually don't think the issue is complicated at all. The artifacts were
looted; they represent the "progress" of imperialism in its destruction of
other cultures. The looting is a commercial process.
To argue against returning the artifacts to the states that currenty rule
the locations of their origin is a bit like claiming property seized by the
Nazis from Jews in Europe should not be returned to the heirs of those Jews
because a)those heirs don't properly appreciate the property b) many of
those Jews support Israel, a colonizing state, and will only use that
property to further finance colonialism-- so let's just leave it in the
Swiss, German, Austrian banks, in the hands of the heirs of the looters.
Fucked up reasoning to the max, IMO.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt" <matt2641 at gmail.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 11:43 AM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] If only....
> Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> While I can't agree with the nonsense about refusing to return
> "religious" artifacts to states/social formations that no longer revere
> them, as a historian I believe that the case of the Buddhas of Bamyan
> creates serious concerns about "repatriation," which I place in quotes
> because of the rather ahistorical construction that links the
> present-day states of Iraq or Egypt with the states/social formations
> that existed in those geographical areas millennia ago. That does not
> mean, of course, that allowing them to remain with the imperialist
> thieves who took them is a good idea either. Just that this issue is a
> bit more complicated than we'd like.
> On 11/12/2010 10:14 AM, S. Artesian wrote:
>> But you see, Shane regards those artifacts, the Declaration of
>> the bill of rights, etc. to be the products of a strictly slaveholders'
>> Send list submissions to: Marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu
>> Set your options at:
> Send list submissions to: Marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu
> Set your options at:
More information about the Marxism