The Koh-i-Noor diamond, and why the British won’t give it back (2017)
31–40 of 327 posts
Re: The Koh-i-Noor diamond, and why the British won’t give it back (2017)
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ideally it should be “bought” from the 3 countries and they should receive a sort of donation. AFAIK they need money a lot more than Britain, and tangible food and resources are a lot more useful than a pretty diamond. Though I kind of doubt this will happen…
> they need money a lot more than Britain, and tangible food and resources are a lot more useful than a pretty diamond This is the comment’s point. The benefits of a trade deal might measure up to the worth of this diamond in minutes.
The diamond is worth only $10-12 billion (edit: at most), which is a decent chunk of money, but only 0.25% of the Indian Federal Government's YEARLY budget or only 10% of the Pakistani Federal Government's YEARLY budget.
EDIT: apparently the diamond is worth even less - google fu has failed me yet again
Re: The Koh-i-Noor diamond, and why the British won’t give it back (2017)
#33James Acaster does a great job highlighting the absurdity of the British refusing to repatriate stuff taken from the empire. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x73PkUvArJY
It's only absurd if you think that countries ought to behave like people in a society. All the laws and rules of societies serve one purpose, to keep themselves stable. The abstraction of Justice doesn't apply outside of society, unfortunately.
Re: The Koh-i-Noor diamond, and why the British won’t give it back (2017)
#34Says what I want to say: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x73PkUvArJY
Re: The Koh-i-Noor diamond, and why the British won’t give it back (2017)
#35Not a fan of the British crown (why are they exempt from taxes during record high inflation) but who should they return the diamond to - Afghanistan (it was the Durranis that looted it from Nader Shah after he looted it from the Mughals), India (Maharaja Ranjit Singh took it as tribute from Shah Shuja after conquering Kashmir from the Durranis), or Pakistan (the Sikh Empire capital was Lahore and the Durrani Empire c…
It's like the argument that California should be given back to Mexico, when Mexico itself was a Spanish colonial construct.
https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/01/25/california-redwood-fo...
Update: To clarify, Turing_Machine likened the suggestion that California be given to Mexico to alephnerd's description of the complex and unclear proper ownership of the Koh-I-Noor. I claim that the situation in California is simpler, at least in some places, because there are native Californians to give stuff back to and multiple tribes are willing to cooperatively take custody and stewardship of the land, as the InterTribal Sinkyone Wilderness Council has. This is in many ways the opposite of Pakistan, India and Afghanistan having competing / mutually incompatible claims.
Re: The Koh-i-Noor diamond, and why the British won’t give it back (2017)
#36James Acaster does a great job highlighting the absurdity of the British refusing to repatriate stuff taken from the empire. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x73PkUvArJY
Brit (well Scot) here. Can only say: yes and it's insane
Re: The Koh-i-Noor diamond, and why the British won’t give it back (2017)
#37[deleted]
Re: The Koh-i-Noor diamond, and why the British won’t give it back (2017)
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's like the argument that California should be given back to Mexico, when Mexico itself was a Spanish colonial construct.
https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/01/25/california-redwood-fo... Update: To clarify, Turing_Machine likened the suggestion that California be given to Mexico to alephnerd's description of the complex and unclear proper ownership of the Koh-I-Noor. I claim that the situation in California is simpler, at least in some places, because there are native Californians to give stuff back to and multiple tribes are willing to…
Tribal Soverignity is a different story than nation state soverignity. The Federal government has supremacy over Tribal and State Government. Worcester v. Georgia still holds
edit: the OP is actually a good example now that he explained it.
Re: The Koh-i-Noor diamond, and why the British won’t give it back (2017)
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
> they need money a lot more than Britain, and tangible food and resources are a lot more useful than a pretty diamond This is the comment’s point. The benefits of a trade deal might measure up to the worth of this diamond in minutes.
The diamond is worth only $10-12 billion (edit: at most), which is a decent chunk of money, but only 0.25% of the Indian Federal Government's YEARLY budget or only 10% of the Pakistani Federal Government's YEARLY budget. EDIT: apparently the diamond is worth even less - google fu has failed me yet again
There's no way it's worth that much.
Articles kicking around estimate at 140 - 400 million, with some "over a billion".
Re: The Koh-i-Noor diamond, and why the British won’t give it back (2017)
#40Not a fan of the British crown (why are they exempt from taxes during record high inflation) but who should they return the diamond to - Afghanistan (it was the Durranis that looted it from Nader Shah after he looted it from the Mughals), India (Maharaja Ranjit Singh took it as tribute from Shah Shuja after conquering Kashmir from the Durranis), or Pakistan (the Sikh Empire capital was Lahore and the Durrani Empire c…
Powder it. Problem solved.