• Dolores [love/loves]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year 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

    • DeHuq2@lemmygrad.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year 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
        ·
        1 year 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!

        • DeHuq2@lemmygrad.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year 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
            1 year 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