> The reason why the destruction of historical artefacts is more effective at achieving this is, perhaps, because while we feel some distant sympathy towards "s

> The reason why the destruction of historical artefacts is more effective at achieving this is, perhaps, because while we feel some distant sympathy towards "some foreigners that I don't know" being murdered, we feel personally insulted by what we regard (rightly) as our collective, human historical heritage being destroyed I think of it like this: even if I suffer and die, me, my family, or at least my culture is indelibly part of history. People will remember something of me forever. My story will be told. In some small way that ameliorates my pain and suffering, gives me a limited form of immortality, makes life that much more worth it. So when someone destroys some of the remnants of a civilization we know so little about, it is as if they cut an unknown number of people permanently out of the tapestry of human history. As if they killed them in some more final way than just ending their lives.