Should British museums return objects to their countries of origin?

The law is the law. Can't just go about tearing up contracts based upon notions of hokum and legitimacy of government, else the bloke who invoiced me for the bathroom would have to enter into decades-long litigation in order to see his 350 quid returned. The freemen of the land would have a ruddy field day.

It depends doesn’t it. Can the safety of those items be guaranteed in the countries of origin?

Is preservation of an object the key thing? Or should restitution be more about redressing past wrongs? Could it be considered paternalistic to demand that countries can only have their objects back if they look after them 'properly'? After all, some objects have been damaged or destroyed during their lives in museums in the West. Who has the right to determine what happens to objects?

These ‘objects’ are key historical artifacts, regardless on where they came from they are part of human cultural experience and history. Some of these objects my come from places which no longer exist.
To return them, without being able to guarantee their safety from thieves for the sake of some half-assed attempt to look like we are repaying some form of debt would be irresponsible.

These ‘objects’ are key historical artifacts, regardless on where they came from they are part of human cultural experience and history. Some of these objects my come from places which no longer exist.
To return them, without being able to guarantee their safety from thieves for the sake of some half-assed attempt to look like we are repaying some form of debt would be irresponsible.

For now. How long after Brexit, with the country starving, will it be before angry mobs break down the doors of the BM and steal ancient mummies and the like to sell for food?

It's not just thieves - sometimes they require protection from the managements of the museums they are housed in. The Parthenon Marbles were severely damaged by BM 'restoration' in the 30s for example.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/1999/nov/12/helenasmith

The museum decided to enable rich folk to hold private parties next to the marbles, apparently with some guests swanning around with glasses of wine around them. Even other museum directors have commented on how crass that was.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/1999/nov/08/davidhencke

This is far from being the only example of mismanagement of antiquities and sloppy conduct by leading western 'patrimony-protection' museums and galleries.

So it isn't only in poorer parts of the world where damage happens as a result of poor protection.

So you resent and would reject for example the global initiatives subscribed to by most countries that property stolen from Jewish people by the Nazis should be repatriated, on the basis that one must respect old laws, even when passed by hateful governments that now no longer exist?

Most governments who have made gifts no longer exist. It becomes a bit problematic if all of their deeds become nullified because they have ceased to be relevant. Likewise, I don't suppose the people who sold British fabrics around the globe truly reflect the attitudes of current GB -- so we should demand all the fabric previously sold be returned to GB, or their value at the time they were sold. It might make up from the losses of Brexit.

Nazis stole things that didn't belong to them; in the context of gifting, the goods did notionally belong to the governments at the time. I think a comparison would be: a) Nazis stealing goods from Jews, b) gifting them to GB or bartering them away c) Jews requesting that the goods be returned to them. This works, as you say, in the Jewish context. It breaks down outside of the Nazism and Jewish context, because the Nazis belong in a sui generis category of ugliness and the West's attempts to "vitiate" their crimes are really unparalleled.

If you look at other genocides in the same time period, they do not even register on Joe Blogg's general knowledge nor do they attract the same transnational "vitiation". Indeed, the non-Jewish victims of the Holocaust attract significantly less attention than the Jewish. The Jewish struggle is unfortunately sui generis.

muh taking **** roll

It's not just thieves - sometimes they require protection from the managements of the museums they are housed in. The Parthenon Marbles were severely damaged by BM 'restoration' in the 30s for example.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/1999/nov/12/helenasmith

The museum decided to enable rich folk to hold private parties next to the marbles, apparently with some guests swanning around with glasses of wine around them. Even other museum directors have commented on how crass that was.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/1999/nov/08/davidhencke

This is far from being the only example of mismanagement of antiquities and sloppy conduct by leading western 'patrimony-protection' museums and galleries.

So it isn't only in poorer parts of the world where damage happens as a result of poor protection.

Yeah but even so, deciding that they should be moved back to their so called countries of origin is the solution then I disagree completely

I’m sorry but why should you be able to keep something that does not belong to you, especially when you compromise its integrity?

And who does it belong to? Nobody alive today. And some historical artifacts are from cultures and societies that no longer exist.
So who would you return them to?

That's a scary thought! In terms of Brexit (or Remain) and the British Museum, a number of people have observed that there is actually very little about this institution that is really 'British' - only a small percentage of the collections are from the UK, and perhaps an even smaller percentage of visitors.

They don’t belong to people but to nations, many of these countries still exist today and are actively trying to take the artefacts back. When safety isn’t an issue and the items were forcefully taken rather than gifted, how is it okay for the U.K. to not open negotiations for their return?

Yeah well good luck with that.

Don’t worry I’m not delusional, of course they’d never give them back. It’s just interesting. Makes me wonder what Britain’s stance would be if the roles were reversed