Does Historic Preservation Matter To Anyone Anymore?

So last week a land developer was given the green light to demolish the James Bell Tavern in Pennsylvania which was built in 1780, and is historically known to be the site of the birthplace of the Bill of Rights. They tore down half the building until they were immediately stopped, so half of it is still standing. Why they were allowed to do this is just disgusting. Nobody knows what the fate of this building will be. I say leave it as is to poetically depict what has happend to our own bill of rights as it's being destroyed by the government and DHS.

 

If only half of it remains it will be completely demolished shortly... The people that care about things like this are not those that are in charge. Those in charge are easily bought these days.

 

preserving things that are good, useful or interesting does to me. just as much, neither more nor less, then replacing those which are none of these things, with those which are.
preserving languages and diverse cultural wisdom does. even restoring local indiginous soverignty, that which really is indiginous, not making excuses for conquests and invasions, is a positive consideration.
absoluteness in anything might not be such a good idea though.
you can't preserve any living thing by freezing it in time. you do that, you kill it just as certainly as if you utterly callously throw it away.

 

its just a building

 

Those who vandalise these sorts of artifacts or think they should be trashed should be locked up in a zoo.

 

whoever owns the property has every right to do whatever they want with it..... within the laws and bylaws and whatever development/preservation rules the city has

if someone wanted it preserved they should have purchased it themselves

 

rights and laws are not automatically equal. i would rather see a building that was interesting be modified then torn down and replaced. not as a matter of nostelgia, but for the avoidance of wasting resources, even if the smoke and mirrors of monetary economics makes destruction and reconstruction monetarily cheaper.

while on the one paw, too many chiefs spoil the pot, on the other, i think of places and even constructed spaces, as something other then property. as something that everyone in some sense 'ownes', other then the parts of it anyone is actually living in.

i'm sorry but i don't worship the great god of money. not that it isn't a useful tool. as long as it is used as a tool. to be creative with.
but almost anything it can buy, and all of the things it possibly can't, are worth more then what is no more then a symbol to represent their value.