The Koh-i-Noor diamond, and why the British won’t give it back (2017) • Hacker News Board

Re: The Koh-i-Noor diamond, and why the British won’t give it back (2017)

#221

Post by imgabe » Fri, Sep 16, 2022, 5:14 AM UTC

cafed00d wrote: post #212

imgabe wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Civilizations clash. Some win, some lose. Should Gaul go back to the Romans? You would have the Earth remain completely static, and wherever your ancestors happened to evolve into humans that’s where you and your descendants live forever until the end of time? It’s ridiculous. Things change. Move on.

That’s a dangerous precedent to set. You’re essentially egging on today’s generation to “clash back”. Colonialism isn’t the same as ancestral predator prey mechanics. Or, that we should reverse every unjust war waged in the world. Some are just blatantly brutal. Simple. We owe it to our species to recognize mistake, apologize and make repairs. Would Britain really say “it’s ridiculous. Things change. Move on” for for…

> Would Britain really say “it’s ridiculous. Things change. Move on” for forcefully castrating Turing simply because he was gay? Oh wait. No. They didn’t actually do that.

And what did that do for Turing? He's still castrated. He's still dead. Were the people who apologized even the ones responsible? They must be mostly dead now too. Was there any serious concern in 2009 when the apology was issued that the UK was going to continue castrating gay people?

That had far more to do with present day politics and empty gestures to appease people like yourself than with making any repairs or apologies to anyone, not that such gestures mean anything to dead people anyway.

The people who used to own the diamond and could theoretically have any rightful claim to it are likewise dead, as are the people who stole it. It is where it is now and moving it somewhere else won't change the past. India's economy just eclipsed the UK's and is on the rise, while the UK is declining, so they'll have the last laugh anyway. Maybe they can buy it back at a yard sale when King George needs to pawn it to pay the rent on Buckingham Palace.

Re: The Koh-i-Noor diamond, and why the British won’t give it back (2017)

#222

Post by getcrunk » Fri, Sep 16, 2022, 5:23 AM UTC

DuskStar wrote: post #144

SanjayMehta wrote: post #135

They can keep the stupid rock provided they return the $45 trillion they stole from India over 200 years. https://www.financialexpress.com/india-news/british-took-45-...

IIRC that is an absolutely bullshit number based on taking what the Brits actually did steal, giving it the most favorable conversion to USD, and then applying a few hundred years of compounding interest. 7% APR for 300 years is a 650,000,000x return.

Oh so they only took 70k worth of stuff ... Sounds about right /s

Also yes I didn't compound, if we compound it's even less lol

Re: The Koh-i-Noor diamond, and why the British won’t give it back (2017)

#223

Post by nishs » Fri, Sep 16, 2022, 5:29 AM UTC

bcrosby95 wrote: post #209

kinj28 wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine a thief comes to your house with a gun & a treaty paper. He gives you two options - 1) sign the treaty paper where I leave you harmless but take away all your wealth 2) kill you and your family and take away all your wealth Which option would you choose? Your heir 200 years later would stop their claim on it ? Fair deal?

You've just described thousands of years of history. Maybe it should be returned to mother earth, that way there would be no violence in the chain of ownership.

unironically. yes. we should throw it into the ocean.

it’s more fair than the current situation and there seem to be no other plans to rectify the situation in the near future either.

Re: The Koh-i-Noor diamond, and why the British won’t give it back (2017)

#224

Post by divbzero » Fri, Sep 16, 2022, 5:30 AM UTC

> “The transition is startling when the diamond becomes a symbol of potency rather than beauty. It becomes this gemstone like the ring in Lord of the Rings, one ring to rule them all.”

A Silmaril would be a better analogy.

Re: The Koh-i-Noor diamond, and why the British won’t give it back (2017)

#225

Post by nishs » Fri, Sep 16, 2022, 5:31 AM UTC

UncleMeat wrote: post #152

twblalock wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

David Frum's new Atlantic article shows a similar situation in Nigeria: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2022/10/benin-b... Basically the Nigerian federal government, the state government of Benin, and the descendants of the kings of Benin who originally owned the stolen Benin bronzes all think they should be the ones to whom the bronzes should be returned -- and in the case of the current king, he assert…

Okay. But that's surely not a reason why the Brits get to keep it. "This is too hard, let's give up and keep bringing in tourist money to our museums through these artifacts" feels like an awfully convenient excuse.

exactly. if you can’t determine a ‘true’ owner, even throwing the diamond into the ocean is a more fair solution than the british monarchy just keeping it while no inkling of plans to ever rectify the situation.

Re: The Koh-i-Noor diamond, and why the British won’t give it back (2017)

#226

Post by divbzero » Fri, Sep 16, 2022, 5:34 AM UTC

Wikipedia’s account of Koh-i-Noor’s history contains this curious tidbit not mentioned in OP.

Although Victoria wore it often, she became uneasy about the way in which the diamond had been acquired. In a letter to her eldest daughter, Victoria, Princess Royal, she wrote in the 1870s: "No one feels more strongly than I do about India or how much I opposed our taking those countries and I think no more will be taken, for it is very wrong and no advantage to us. You know also how I dislike wearing the Koh-i-Noor".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koh-i-Noor

Re: The Koh-i-Noor diamond, and why the British won’t give it back (2017)

#227

Post by nradov » Fri, Sep 16, 2022, 5:34 AM UTC

osrec wrote: post #198

UncleMeat wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People screech in terror and hide their wallets anytime the word "reparations" is said. I don't think colonial empires are going to be sending a considerable amount of plundered money back any time soon.

Quite true, not sure why you're down-voted. Colonial empires managed to get away extremely lightly, with respect to putting right their wrongs. Compare that to Nazi Germany, where reparations were paid in significant quantities, and kids in schools are still taught to be embarrassed by that section of their country's history. Whereas you get the sense that Britain is still, in some ways, proud of its rather ruthless…

Should Mali also pay reparations to Ghana over the atrocities they committed during 13th century wars of conquest?

Re: The Koh-i-Noor diamond, and why the British won’t give it back (2017)

#228

Post by goto11 » Fri, Sep 16, 2022, 5:41 AM UTC

alephnerd wrote: post #3

Not 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…

I guess that means if somebody stole the diamond from the crown today, they would get to keep it?

Re: The Koh-i-Noor diamond, and why the British won’t give it back (2017)

#229

Post by Ekaros » Fri, Sep 16, 2022, 5:41 AM UTC

karaokeyoga wrote: post #201

p_j_w wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You won't mind if my gang and I steal your TV at gunpoint then?

I would mind, because possession is nine tenths of the law.

Especially possession of guns and weapon systems.

Re: The Koh-i-Noor diamond, and why the British won’t give it back (2017)

#230

Post by osrec » Fri, Sep 16, 2022, 5:50 AM UTC

nradov wrote: post #227

osrec wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quite true, not sure why you're down-voted. Colonial empires managed to get away extremely lightly, with respect to putting right their wrongs. Compare that to Nazi Germany, where reparations were paid in significant quantities, and kids in schools are still taught to be embarrassed by that section of their country's history. Whereas you get the sense that Britain is still, in some ways, proud of its rather ruthless…

Should Mali also pay reparations to Ghana over the atrocities they committed during 13th century wars of conquest?

Your comment is somewhat meaningless in the context. But yes, in general, I believe that if you commit or benefit from atrocities, you should be held accountable. Even if it was your grandfather that murdered people and you inherit the wealth he looted, you should at the very least give that wealth back once you realise that it was wrong, especially if the people you looted from are dying from lack of resources.

Also, just in terms of numbers, the British empire was pretty insane in terms of the quantity of people it murdered, both directly and indirectly. The number is much higher than those murdered by the Nazis, even if it happened over a longer period. They should certainly be held accountable, at the very least.