277
submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

Paris's Louvre museum said on Thursday, November 27, it would raise ticket prices for most non-EU visitors, meaning US, British and Chinese tourists among others will have to pay $37 to get in.

The museum told Agence France-Presse (AFP) the 45% price hike aims to boost annual revenues by up to $23 million to fund structural improvements at the world's most-visited art museum, which is reeling from the daylight theft of priceless treasures last month.

From 2026, visitors from outside the European Union, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway will have to pay €32 – an extra €10 – from January 14, the museum and staff unions said after the measure was approved at a museum board meeting.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Muehe@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 days ago

Thus using “race” is biologically ambiguous and “ethnic groups” should be preferred, however it is still very well socially defined.

"Ethnic group" is an anthropological category, not a biological one. The correct biological term is "subspecies", which Wikipedia defines as "populations that live in different areas and vary in size, shape, or other physical characteristics (morphology), but that can successfully interbreed."

Using “race” in a social context makes sense and is far from being racist.

Given the history of its usage in that context, I have to vehemently disagree. Plus it is so ill defined that it is a useless term anyway. From Wikipedia again: "[...] various definitions exist. Sometimes it is used to denote a level below that of subspecies, while at other times it is used as a synonym for subspecies."

Using it invokes all the Social Darwinism and whatnot that the Nazis and others abused it for. So where is the sense in using it exactly?

[-] SlimePirate@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 days ago

An actually good answer.

But what I disagree with is that the word race being used by racists is justified to call random people racists. I do not use it personally anyway

[-] Muehe@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 days ago

Oh yeah, not saying that anybody using the word is a racist. Just ignorant, you shouldn't use it if you are aware of its historical context.

this post was submitted on 28 Nov 2025
277 points (100.0% liked)

World News

50987 readers
2489 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS