Aside from the ridiculous price tag, it would set a dangerous precedent. It's not so much about the value of the art itself, which is debatable, but rather how

Aside from the ridiculous price tag, it would set a dangerous precedent. It's not so much about the value of the art itself, which is debatable, but rather how appropriate removing a historical testimony is. Just because an interpretation no longer fits with today's view doesn't mean people should forget the history behind it nor the mentality surrounding it at a particular time. Erasing remnants of a past you disagree with doesn't erase the facts, but it makes people less inclined to remember or learn about a not so glorious history. It raises questions about the exact motives at stake here.