4 ms·

Builders bulldoze Mayan Pyramid

36 points by codecurve 13y ago

swombat 13y ago
I say strip them of their rights and ship them to Afghanistan to have a drink with their buddies who blew up the 1,500-year old Buddha statues there... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhas_of_Bamiyan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhas_of_Bamiyan)
tetha 13y ago
I'm sad now.
mu_killnine 13y ago
Unfortunately, I doubt that anything (beyond a few incensed academics) will come of this. That, to me, is the true tragedy because it virtually ensures that it's only a matter of time before this happens again.
binaryatrocity 13y ago
My heritage and history destroyed, and for what? It's stuff like this that makes me not want to wake up in the morning, much less procreate.
matthuggins 13y ago
I hate humans. I hope we go extinct.
- cafard 13y ago
  Then von Danikens visitors from outer space can come back and rebuild the Mayan pyramids?
- zokier 13y ago
  I'd understand that sentiment better if the item in question wasn't a human monument.
lake99 13y ago
I hope Belize and other such places learn their lesson from this about leaving important places unprotected. For instance, if someone can blow up Giant Crystal Cave of Mexico, just for the fun of it, someone will, eventually. It's not as if there is a shortage of stupid people anywhere.
- skreech 13y ago
  Yes, and when local governments lack the power, desire and/or resources to protect heritage sites, can the larger world community step in, and how? Perhaps start by buying the land where such sites are located?
  - lake99 13y ago
    Sure, the private-property solution can work well, as can active governmental protection. In this case though, Belizean laws made the destruction easy. This monument was on private property, but the monument itself was under government "protection". The owner of the land had no incentive to protect it.
    - swombat 13y ago
      He would have had an incentive if letting it be damaged recklessly meant he'd go straight to jail...
snowwrestler 13y ago
Like the rest of the commenters I feel horrified about this. But why do I feel this way? The vast majority of buildings are demolished and recycled. What is about this one--the age, I assume? Maybe it's a symbol of humanity's time on the earth--but why is that personally important to me? Maybe I'm nuts but I think it's fascinating to really dig into the "why" behind such a common emotional reaction.
- thaumasiotes 13y ago
  Many humans value stasis for its own sake. This is the urge powering most of the US environmental movement.
  - Webster 13y ago
    And here I thought that the driving force was the desire for clean water and clean air.
    - thaumasiotes 13y ago
      This is fairly easy to dispute... people aren't even asking for clean water and clean air (we have those already!). They're asking for things like habitat preservation and biodiversity. Here are the Sierra Club's top goals[1]: - end use of coal, oil, and natural gas (this is three goals for them, but I see them as thematically linked) This is a mix. They attack all three for being "dirty". They also attack oil because oil corporations are engines of political corruption (it strikes me that while this is something you can come up with if you're already against oil on principle, you're unlikely to decide, based on this, that you should be against oil). And, they attack oil and natural gas (I didn't check coal) because the extraction process causes "environmental damage". - "Resilient Habitats" Seems to be half about preserving existing ecosystems and half about preventing climate change. Nothing to do with clean water or clean air. - "Protecting America's Waters" Definitely a clean water issue. Here are Greenpeace's "What We Do"s[2]: - Protecting Ancient Forests "We're working to create a world with zero deforestation." This is a stasis issue. - Protecting our oceans Unlike the Sierra Club, Greenpeace is not worried about water pollution. It's worried about overfishing (and especially overwhaling). This is another stasis issue. - Stopping Global Warming Yep, a stasis issue. Look at my sibling comment -- the problem with destruction of this buried temple is that the loss is irrevocable. It's not that the temple was in use for any purpose (it wasn't), or that there could have been a future use; it's just that something we "had" is now gone. Don't confuse the reason a movement began with the same movement's current goals. Movements do not cease just because they've achieved their goals. [1] https://content.sierraclub.org/sierra-club-programs https://content.sierraclub.org/sierra-club-programs [2] http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/en/campaigns/ http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/en/campaigns/

36 points by codecurve 13y ago

I say strip them of their rights and ship them to Afghanistan to have a drink with their buddies who blew up the 1,500-year old Buddha statues there... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhas_of_Bamiyan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhas_of_Bamiyan)

tetha 13y ago

I'm sad now.

mu_killnine 13y ago

Unfortunately, I doubt that anything (beyond a few incensed academics) will come of this. That, to me, is the true tragedy because it virtually ensures that it's only a matter of time before this happens again.

binaryatrocity 13y ago

My heritage and history destroyed, and for what? It's stuff like this that makes me not want to wake up in the morning, much less procreate.

matthuggins 13y ago

I hate humans. I hope we go extinct.

cafard 13y ago
Then von Danikens visitors from outer space can come back and rebuild the Mayan pyramids?
zokier 13y ago
I'd understand that sentiment better if the item in question wasn't a human monument.

lake99 13y ago

I hope Belize and other such places learn their lesson from this about leaving important places unprotected. For instance, if someone can blow up Giant Crystal Cave of Mexico, just for the fun of it, someone will, eventually. It's not as if there is a shortage of stupid people anywhere.

skreech 13y ago
Yes, and when local governments lack the power, desire and/or resources to protect heritage sites, can the larger world community step in, and how? Perhaps start by buying the land where such sites are located?
- lake99 13y ago
  Sure, the private-property solution can work well, as can active governmental protection. In this case though, Belizean laws made the destruction easy. This monument was on private property, but the monument itself was under government "protection". The owner of the land had no incentive to protect it.
  - swombat 13y ago
    He would have had an incentive if letting it be damaged recklessly meant he'd go straight to jail...

snowwrestler 13y ago

Like the rest of the commenters I feel horrified about this. But why do I feel this way? The vast majority of buildings are demolished and recycled. What is about this one--the age, I assume? Maybe it's a symbol of humanity's time on the earth--but why is that personally important to me? Maybe I'm nuts but I think it's fascinating to really dig into the "why" behind such a common emotional reaction.

thaumasiotes 13y ago
Many humans value stasis for its own sake. This is the urge powering most of the US environmental movement.
- Webster 13y ago
  And here I thought that the driving force was the desire for clean water and clean air.
  - thaumasiotes 13y ago
    This is fairly easy to dispute... people aren't even asking for clean water and clean air (we have those already!). They're asking for things like habitat preservation and biodiversity. Here are the Sierra Club's top goals[1]: - end use of coal, oil, and natural gas (this is three goals for them, but I see them as thematically linked) This is a mix. They attack all three for being "dirty". They also attack oil because oil corporations are engines of political corruption (it strikes me that while this is something you can come up with if you're already against oil on principle, you're unlikely to decide, based on this, that you should be against oil). And, they attack oil and natural gas (I didn't check coal) because the extraction process causes "environmental damage". - "Resilient Habitats" Seems to be half about preserving existing ecosystems and half about preventing climate change. Nothing to do with clean water or clean air. - "Protecting America's Waters" Definitely a clean water issue. Here are Greenpeace's "What We Do"s[2]: - Protecting Ancient Forests "We're working to create a world with zero deforestation." This is a stasis issue. - Protecting our oceans Unlike the Sierra Club, Greenpeace is not worried about water pollution. It's worried about overfishing (and especially overwhaling). This is another stasis issue. - Stopping Global Warming Yep, a stasis issue. Look at my sibling comment -- the problem with destruction of this buried temple is that the loss is irrevocable. It's not that the temple was in use for any purpose (it wasn't), or that there could have been a future use; it's just that something we "had" is now gone. Don't confuse the reason a movement began with the same movement's current goals. Movements do not cease just because they've achieved their goals. [1] https://content.sierraclub.org/sierra-club-programs https://content.sierraclub.org/sierra-club-programs [2] http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/en/campaigns/ http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/en/campaigns/