The simple physical act of rebluing has little to do with ethics.

It is what happens to, or is done with, the rifle afterwards, where the ethics issue arises. Since we cannot take our toys to the afterlife, the "personal property - I'll do what I f-well please" argument holds no water, at all.

If the arm is in 100% military configuration, but in less than pristine condition, then I think most people would agree that it should be left alone.

If it has been brutally bubbacized, then I would think that few people would care.

Consider the rifle shown to us by Ljohns, today found 3 topics below this one.  Did many (or any) leave Springfield Armory with that sort of finish?  I would not say that none were made like that.  Some might have been given that treatment for ceremonial use or for VIPs or some such.  But we know that ordinary issue Krags did not look like that. 

To me, it looks like a very nice 1950s or 60s reblue & refinish job.  I would not advise someone with a nice original Krag to do that today.  But I am looking for a nice 98 rifle.  If that were offered for sale, I would buy it in a heartbeat at $500, but would not at twice that. 

I think you need to look at it in the context of our role as caretakers of this old stuff, and of potential markets & changing tastes for our heirs.  Right now, patina has a positive value for us, because we like Krags. At present, we seem to be using the "Antiques Roadshow" rules as applied to old furniture.

In 1958, markets & tastes were different. Ljohns rifle is representative of that period, as are the chrome plated Krags we have seen recently. 

Ignoring politics, what will the future hold for arms collectors?  How much of an influence on the collectors of the future will the "Restoration" TV shows have?  Would you prefer a rusty old Coke machine that leaks water and maybe does not work or one with shiny red paint, the leaks plugged, and a working refrigeration unit?

The point about the Coke machine is well-taken - and, I have zero qualms about coming to the instant conclusion that there is NO question but that, in that case, as well as cars, that I would prefer the restoration, hands down.

I cannot find the words to describe the "difference", but, to me, there is a definite difference, between modern utilitarian items, and objects with a "history".

I agree 100% too!  There is a huge difference between a restored car with a higher resale value than a rust bucket... and a 1898 rifle with deep un-natural bluing and no original finnish.  I'll take the un-restored rifle any day and twice on Sunday!!!