<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Modern politics and that dirty, dirty word</title>
	<atom:link href="http://guyberes.com/2008/03/05/modern-politics-and-that-dirty-dirty-word/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://guyberes.com/2008/03/05/modern-politics-and-that-dirty-dirty-word/</link>
	<description>On Sunday ring road supermarket. No killing moths or putting boiling water on the ants.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 21:10:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Guy</title>
		<link>http://guyberes.com/2008/03/05/modern-politics-and-that-dirty-dirty-word/comment-page-1/#comment-207</link>
		<dc:creator>Guy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Mar 2008 08:55:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://guyberes.com/2008/03/05/modern-politics-and-that-dirty-dirty-word/#comment-207</guid>
		<description>Yes, I agree with your point - just as socialism is often abused in absolutist terms by the broader right, capitalism is often abused in absolutist terms from the broader left. I don&#039;t think taking an absolutist line on either makes a great deal of sense, particular when one considers the decidedly middle ground course that most Western governments are currently taking today.

There are very few people indeed who realistically sit in an absolutist position with respect to either capitalism or socialism. 

I think the decentralisation that the market offers is a valuable tool and can be used to democratise political environments under the right conditions. However, I also think that in some situations, no amount of decentralisation of an economy (to take an example: Aboriginal communities in Australia) is going to do the job on its own. That&#039;s a job that I don&#039;t think can be satisfied without sustained government assistance, guidance, and intervention of some form.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, I agree with your point &#8211; just as socialism is often abused in absolutist terms by the broader right, capitalism is often abused in absolutist terms from the broader left. I don&#8217;t think taking an absolutist line on either makes a great deal of sense, particular when one considers the decidedly middle ground course that most Western governments are currently taking today.</p>
<p>There are very few people indeed who realistically sit in an absolutist position with respect to either capitalism or socialism. </p>
<p>I think the decentralisation that the market offers is a valuable tool and can be used to democratise political environments under the right conditions. However, I also think that in some situations, no amount of decentralisation of an economy (to take an example: Aboriginal communities in Australia) is going to do the job on its own. That&#8217;s a job that I don&#8217;t think can be satisfied without sustained government assistance, guidance, and intervention of some form.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: fatfingers</title>
		<link>http://guyberes.com/2008/03/05/modern-politics-and-that-dirty-dirty-word/comment-page-1/#comment-197</link>
		<dc:creator>fatfingers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2008 23:20:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://guyberes.com/2008/03/05/modern-politics-and-that-dirty-dirty-word/#comment-197</guid>
		<description>I have found that &#039;socialism&#039; has a common stigma with &#039;capitalism&#039; - both are interpreted as extremes by a lot of people. The politically sophisticated can use one or the other more easily (even both, sometimes) but of course with qualifiers that make them more precise, as you do in your post.

And just quickly - the market provides ample space for &quot;planning and sharing&quot; and cooperation, it&#039;s just that they are decentralised (and therefore arguably more democratic).

I found this blog via Missing Link, and while it&#039;s no Slashdot or Digg, it garnered you at least one extra page hit. ;-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have found that &#8217;socialism&#8217; has a common stigma with &#8216;capitalism&#8217; &#8211; both are interpreted as extremes by a lot of people. The politically sophisticated can use one or the other more easily (even both, sometimes) but of course with qualifiers that make them more precise, as you do in your post.</p>
<p>And just quickly &#8211; the market provides ample space for &#8220;planning and sharing&#8221; and cooperation, it&#8217;s just that they are decentralised (and therefore arguably more democratic).</p>
<p>I found this blog via Missing Link, and while it&#8217;s no Slashdot or Digg, it garnered you at least one extra page hit. <img src='http://guyberes.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Club Troppo &#187; Missing Link Daily</title>
		<link>http://guyberes.com/2008/03/05/modern-politics-and-that-dirty-dirty-word/comment-page-1/#comment-191</link>
		<dc:creator>Club Troppo &#187; Missing Link Daily</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2008 22:18:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://guyberes.com/2008/03/05/modern-politics-and-that-dirty-dirty-word/#comment-191</guid>
		<description>[...] Guy Beres wonders why socialism is a dirty word. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Guy Beres wonders why socialism is a dirty word. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

