ncooty

I didn't hear anything in this story to indicate that the club was stolen or in any way misappropriated. In fact, the Tongan academic seemed to use some very loose language to imply that this object is a living ancestor, a view I'm not convinced other Tongans would share, but one that clearly fits in certain quasi-academic fields that sanctify and project victimhood. If the Tongans at the time thought this object was a living member of their society, then why did they sell it or give it away? Maybe they didn't think of it that way, but then, this would be a lost opportunity for a social-science academic to tell a story of imagined victimhood. It's a dangerous thing to suggest that cultures or genetic sub-groups should not mix, and to enforce it even through possession of artifacts. (Stolen objects are obviously a different matter.)