Kira Posted November 8, 2014 Report Share Posted November 8, 2014 The other day, I picked up a magazine in the library that was of the international relations scope of things. One article that I found quite intriguing was based on this expanding idea of national treasures being national property. To rephrase: If it came from a region within the current state's (country's) borders, then that state lays claim to it, demanding that it be returned to its "rightful place", no matter how old, and no matter that when it originated from that region, a related people, yet more than likely entirely defunct government existed. By this idea, for example, everything the ancient Egyptians ever produced could (and would) be legally claimed by modern day Egypt, to be returned to within the geographical borders of (modern day) Egypt forthwith. There have, according to the article, been a number of examples of various national states saying "It came from this region, it's our heritage, and we want it back!", and them ending up with whatever it was, on exactly that basis. What brought me here with this idea was the current discussion about the F-86 leaving Britain for the U.S. By the standard of the idea of National Heritage, National Property, the aircraft originated here, so yes, it indeed belongs here. Now for my take on it. I think the idea is absolutely ridiculous, silly, and at its base, just plain old wrong. History belongs to all of us. How are we to learn about each other if everything that makes us who we are is bottled up within our own self imposed borders? Quite frankly, the idea is simply one more wedge to drive people apart, like there aren't more than enough (more than zero) of those already. I see little reason why this aircraft shouldn't stay in Britain (though undoubtedly it was put on the market and sold). Certainly not for the reason of the NHNP idea, though I doubt that has anything to do with it. The only thing that really gets me with regards to letting other states have pieces of your history is when they don't take care of them. I can note any number of outdoor museums where these treasures of aviation history are rusting away, and won't be available for the next generation's children to enjoy. That is truly sad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2. Administrators Jabo Posted November 8, 2014 2. Administrators Report Share Posted November 8, 2014 I'm inclined to agree Kira - The F-86A is a unique airframe and we have been very fortunate in the UK that it has been based here so long and (perhaps) naturally, people (myself included) are sad to see it leave but the warbird business is precisely that - a business and airframes whether unique, historic or whatever move about all the time and what people tend to forget is that this gives us the chance to see new stuff on a fairly regular basis. As you rightly point out the real crime would be failing to look after something that you hold in trust for the future - don't get me started on a certain aircraft acquired by a certain individual in a certain country which was then allowed to decompose gently in a hangar (allegedly). Moving on... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DD_Bongodriver Posted November 8, 2014 Report Share Posted November 8, 2014 Does he share a name with a frog? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2. Administrators Jabo Posted November 8, 2014 2. Administrators Report Share Posted November 8, 2014 No comment Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.