Does Collecting Certain Coins Create an Ethical Dilemma?

I think you and I are in complete agreement. I think Hitler is focused on for a couple reasons. Firstly...as you said he is fairly recent in history. Secondly, he did try and wipe out a race...but so did several others on your list. Just two that come to mind off your list are Stalin and Pol Pot...one you didn't mention and is far more recent was Slobodan Milosevic. In a way...all these people are similar. In fact, the parallels between Stalin and Hitler are probably the strongest because they both targeted the Jews. There is a lot of very strong evidence that Stalin had planned his own "final solution" and died before he could to implement it. I'm in no way trying to make Hitler appear less evil...because he certainly is one of the most vile creatures were have ever known, but he is certainly not alone.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

If you tour the Georgia State Capital in Atlanta, you will be amazed at the artwork. Confederte "heros" everywhere, but not a trace of the nations greatest president ever, Abe Lincoln. When you stand and stare at the enormous oil on canvase portrait of Jefferson Davis, there is little doubt that even today, much of the south considers Lincoln a war criminal. As crazy as it may sound, to some, the Lincoln cent isn't an ethical coin. Which just goes to show, nearly every coin out there has someone who hates it and thinks its evil.

 

I am a northerner and don't consider it crazy. Lincoln intentionally violated the Constitution in numerous ways. I do not consider such actions the acts of "the greatest president", especially comparing him with such great as Washington, Jefferson, and others who put their personal lives and fortunes at high risk to create this nation.

Nothing in the Constitution forbade a state leaving it, so from my viewpoint I consider what the South did legal, and the North's war on it the illegality.

Sorry, not trying to derail the thread, and PrinceofWaldo makes a great point about perspective. Some of my Russian friends still miss Stalin, if that can be believed. Of course, their schools never teach the real history of his reign.

Chris

 

What is repulsive is the persons trying to collect an outstanding premium on the coins. I would not have a problem with buying a few WTC ASE's as a history lesson for my children, but i refuse to buyinto the hype of paying 150 for an eagle because someone wants to tug on your heart strings....

 

Well, if you really value the Constitution so much...perhaps Jefferson isn't the best idol either. Jefferson was a strong Constitutionalist and believed that it should be very strictly followed. He believed that the powers laid out in it were not meant for a lot of flexible interputation. But, when 1803 rolled around and the he had a chance to complete the Louisiana Purchase...he did so. The Constitution did not give him the right to do so and he did anyway. I do believe that it was in the greater interest of the nation to do so...but it was probably illegal. I think the same statement could be made for Lincoln's choices.

Plus, and I could be wrong, a lot of what Lincoln did was allowed by law through emergency power granted to the President at time of war. One example is the suspension of Habeas Corpus.

 

I understand the LP argument, but that was more timing, as the Congress did authorize it and agreed with it, they simply could not due to communications at the time be able to before the deal would have been called off. You are arguing about powers in a time of war, well that war was illegal since there was not anything in the Constitution forbidding a state leaving. If that is agreed, the every action afterwards was illegal. That was my point.

Like the nature of the post from Princeofwaldo, its perspective.

 

And that is your choice...but I don't think there is anything wrong with anyone else doing it. Plus, the examples selling for $150 are not sellers "tugging at your heart strings" but sellers who are selling at the price that is competitive in the market. It's the price knowledgeable collectors are willing to pay.

The people who are "tugging at heartstrings" are the people who sent the email ad that sparked the original thread (that in-turn sparked this one). That ad from the "New York Mint" was sent out only 2 weeks before the 10th anniversary of the attacks actually began with "On the bright, sunny morning of September 11, 2001, more than $200 million in gold and silver was locked in the underground vaults of the COMEX Banking System — far below the gleaming Twin Towers of the World Trade Center." This continued on for several paragraphs until finally comparing the events to Pearl Harbor. Then...that coin could be yours for $495. That is at minimum 2x the current fair market price for the coin. IMHO, these people are "tugging at heartstrings" and trying to make a profit off the tragedy. They are targeting not coin collectors who know what the going value is for these coins...but they are targeting the unknowledgeable populous who they hope to swindle using emotion. Trust me, dealers are making a profit on these coins selling them at the accepted market value...and there is nothing wrong with that in my eyes. However, the NY Mint is taking advantage of a tragedy and IMHO there is a difference. Maybe it's only a difference to me...but that is where I draw the line. Here is a link to that ad (which was originally posted in the other thread):

http://www.newyorkmint.com/itemd.asp?itemNo=225941&ad=NY918P2

 

It's not for me to dissuade anyone from actively and aggressively pursuing their interests of any aspect of Numismatics or any other area of collectibles. My opinions, are simply just that, no more, no less. I don't particularly care for the piece in question. I think it seriously is lacking in design.

As an active collector, a single example will be in my collection.

 

The Constitution does give the President power over the military though...and that does not require a declaration of war. We haven't declared war since 1941...yet we have really fought two major "wars" since then. The Civil War was considered an act of rebellion and I suppose legally the military action taken was a "police action" just as it was in Korea and Vietnam.

 

I am rather less concerned now about what presidents in the 19th century in violation of the constitution and the good of the country - an am certainly more concerned what has been done in the last couple of decades - by both parties.

 

Of that I think most everyone on this board can agree sir.

Chris

 

I agree with you completely. Those events of 100 years ago and more are just history now...they have little impact on the day to day actions of the world. Plus, looking back at them with ideals of today isn't exactly a fair way of analizing the past anyway. I am more concerned with the events that have occured during our lifetime...but most importantly where we are heading.

I believe that we must use our experiences from the past to help guide our future. Use those lessons learned...we shouldn't forget about the negative events in the past because they are so "terrible." For me, collecting currency/coins that were apart of that past...be it from Nazi Germany, Confederate States of America, or WTC. It allows me to remember those events better. To have something tangible serves as a reminder for me of what happened. BY remembering, we can ensure that those terrible things never happen again.

 

+1

 

Didn't read the whole thread but here's my humble opinion:

I personally have no problem collecting any coins. As for Hitler, some would have us melt them all and burn all things related to him, but then how are we supposed to remember? I already hear of/speak with people from time to time that believe the Holocaust never happened. Coins are a piece of history that can help us to remember what happened whether it be good or bad. I have a couple of Third Reich coins as well as USSR coins but I am just as against them as anybody here.
That said, I would have a problem if you supported the actions of men like Hitler/Stalin, but I don't think collecting coins from their countries supports their causes.

 

I guess one would be in a real pickle collecting wise if you were like me and had ancestors on both sides of the American revolution, both sides of the Civil War etc. and wouldn't collect one side or another. One of my ancestors was a Hessian mercenary hired by the British to fight in America - somehow when the war ended he didn't find his way to his ship, but did find his way to central Pennsylvania where he lived out his life. That is when genealogy gets totally fascinating.

 

I studied history in college and maybe that's why I have always been able to look at the bad things that have happened in the past in more of an academic way without being personally offended by them. I don't think people need to feel guilty about owning relics of "evil empires" as long as they do not intend to glorify the accomplishments of these empires, and if they do then they probably wouldn't feel guilty anyway. One of the first coins I can remember being excited about when I was a kid was a Nazi 1 pfennig coin I found mixed in with some world coins I inherited. It was exciting because it was a relic of a world that no longer existed, which is why I am interested in coins in general. One of the first things I sought out when I started buying coins and paper money was examples from former empires and colonies or with famous leaders on them. It's history and I don't feel bad about owning it.

 

Anything is collectable. Collect what you liked based on your own ethics and personal beliefs.

I think this question is related to some of the points in this thread: What do folks think of Daniel Carr's latest hard times token? TC

http://www.dc-coin.com/images/products/detail/HTPAN_2011_SS.jpg

 

Somebody's Missin' Joe (Stalin)? Now there's a poor fellow indeed.......

 

The fact is that the Spanish took over large areas of Central America, slaughtered men, women and children, disrupted families and stole the natives' treasures. They took the gold and silver artifacts, melted them down and created bullion and coinage from the loot. There are no orphans alive today resulting from these actions but 200+ years ago there were plenty.

If you don't consider that Central american bullion and coinage to be "blood money" then you don't understand the definition. The fact that much of it was later lost in shipwrecks is not the point. The recovery of this treasure and subsequent profiteering in its sale is giving acceptance to the way it was collected in the first place. Ideally, it should be returned to the survivors of the civilizations from which it was taken.

 

Now this thread is REALLY getting interesting. I suppose we should melt down all the French gold coinage struck under Napoleon as well since most of it was booty from Italy and Austria after his militairy conquests.