• Dolores [love/loves]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    9 months ago

    Russia is not unique in that. i’m just saying it’s weird to imagine a time and place that’s so vivid in our memory today could be in the same category as ‘real’ history. it’s not advocacy for pinching a russian painting

    • DeHuq2OP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      9 months ago

      Althrough i am sure there are people over a hundred years alive today, i sincerely doubt russian empire is vivid in anyone’s memory. Where do you think “real” history starts at?

      • Dolores [love/loves]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        9 months ago

        i can watch movies and listen to music recorded then. there’s objects and buildings that old all over. you can read what people back then wrote almost effortlessly. there’s millions of photographs!

        • DeHuq2OP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          9 months ago

          That still doesent change the interternational definitions of a cultural property. I dont get why you are so stubborn about it. It is called cultural property, not ancient.

          • Dolores [love/loves]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            i don’t know why you chose to interpret ‘a century doesn’t feel that old to me’ comment as some kind of attack on the concept of protecting cultural objects, but here we are. i was never arguing with you

            • DeHuq2OP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              9 months ago

              Your original comment seemed mildly insensitive to me