In reply to a point I made earlier on this blog (to which he once again does not have the courtesy to direct his readers by a link) Wayne Sayles ("More from Barford about ACCG") whinges that his US dugup dealers' lobby group, the ACCG:
does not oppose the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act and never has. What the guild opposes is the blatant disregard for provisions of that law by administrators who are charged with its implementation. Consequently, the guild does not typically comment on MOU requests that lie outside of its area of specific knowledge and concern.Because that alleged "blatant disregard for provisions of that law by administrators who are charged with its implementation" only exists when the smuggled heritage of coin-using cultures is being discussed? That those "administrators who are charged with implementation of the CCPIA" are intent on victimising just one segment of the artefact-using American public, the importers of dugup ancient coins without proper export licences?
The coiney claims that in the US:
ancient coin collectors are more concerned than the general public about cultural property law violations [...] Collectors are typically passionate about their interests and the ACCG is no exception. How many private citizens of ANY country woud dedicate as much time and energy to the preservation of longstanding rights and freedoms?I would say that the US understanding of "rights and freedoms" seems to differ from the rest of the world, in this - as in much other reas of social life. Perhaps we should note that most of those who stand up for rights and freedoms across the world (including opposing the spectre of US imposition) do so in defence of things other than their own selfish desires to be free to purchase illicit and smuggled artefacts taken from foreign lands.