Post #443360 by Sophista-tiki on Sun, Mar 29, 2009 9:26 AM

if you are specifically referring to an impoverished third world country, the chances are that a remote village would not be the sole destination of a repatriated object the likely scenario would be a national government funded museum. that doesn't mean that it has to be a state of the art facility museums come in all sizes, some of the best museums are only a couple of rooms and staffed by one volunteer. they may not know the ins and outs of higher educated study of artifacts but simply the fact that its there provides an avenue for some one from "western civilization" to travel there and study, and even making an impact on contributing to the native history and culture.
what you described about third world countries only being interested in the latest DVD or pair of jeans may be true but that doesn't apply to everyone. there are preservationists in every corner of the globe. where there's a will there's a way.
AND I didn't say that having the capabilities to do so was a "criteria" for wanting objects back. But you bet that "righty whitey" would use that as an excuse to keep said objects.
I have a degree in museum studies and have
spent a couple of yrs discussing repatriation of objects and heard all side of the argument.
basically the "requirements" are based on proving original ownership.
There is a new thinking in the museum world , many objects will be returned, it may not happen over night, it may take decades. but things ARE changing and the next generation of museum workers, historians and preservationists are being taught to consider such issues.
thus making it part of the concieoussness of western civilization AND beyond.