<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
     xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
     xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
     xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
	<channel>
	  <title>Ask MetaFilter questions tagged with Galbraith</title>
      <link>http://ask.metafilter.com/tags/Galbraith</link>
      <description>Questions tagged with 'Galbraith' at Ask MetaFilter.</description>
	  <pubDate>Sat, 06 May 2006 12:57:31 -0800</pubDate> <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 May 2006 12:57:31 -0800</lastBuildDate>

      <language>en-us</language>
	  <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
	  <ttl>60</ttl>	  
	<item>
	<title>How is &quot;yeomanry&quot; used in this context?</title>
	<link>http://ask.metafilter.com/37685/How%2Dis%2Dyeomanry%2Dused%2Din%2Dthis%2Dcontext</link>	
	<description>Can someone explain a WF Buckley use of the word &quot;yeomanry&quot;? Here is an excerpt from Buckley&apos;s review of Galbraith&apos;s &lt;i&gt;The Culture of Contentment&lt;/i&gt;:&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
&quot;It is fortunate for Professor Galbraith that he was born with singular gifts as a writer. It is a pity he hasn&apos;t used these skills in other ways than to try year after year to bail out his sinking ships. Granted, one can take satisfaction from his anti-historical exertions, and wholesome pleasure from his &lt;i&gt;&lt;b&gt;yeomanry&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/i&gt; as a sump-pumper. Indeed, his rhythm and grace recall the skills we remember having been developed by Ben-Hur, the model galley slave, whose only request of the quartermaster was that he be allowed every month to move to the other side of the boat, to ensure a parallel development in the musculature of his arms and legs.&quot;&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
I know what a yeoman is. And I am familiar with Yeoman Regiments. But I just don&apos;t get the nuance.</description>
	<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:ask.metafilter.com,2006:site.37685</guid>
	<pubDate>Sat, 06 May 2006 12:57:31 -0800</pubDate>
	<category>Buckley</category>
	<category>Galbraith</category>
	<category>language</category>
	<category>words</category>
	<dc:creator>zorro astor</dc:creator>
	</item>
	<item>
	<title>Political Philosophy</title>
	<link>http://ask.metafilter.com/12861/Political%2DPhilosophy</link>	
	<description> &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1573921394/metafilter-20/ref=nosim/&quot;&gt;Keynes?&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0226320618/metafilter-20/ref=nosim/&quot;&gt;Hayek?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0618119639/metafilter-20/ref=nosim/&quot;&gt;Galbraith?&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0895261715/metafilter-20/ref=nosim/&quot;&gt;Burke?&lt;/a&gt;   I&apos;m reevaluating all of my political stances and I&apos;m trying to find a few books that will give  me a decent understanding of the  basis for today&apos;s Conservative and Liberal philosophies. What  are the 3 to 5 best books per side to get a reasonably strong overview of what they&apos;re about?</description>
	<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:ask.metafilter.com,2004:site.12861</guid>
	<pubDate>Sun, 12 Dec 2004 18:45:43 -0800</pubDate>
	<category>burke</category>
	<category>galbraith</category>
	<category>hayek</category>
	<category>keynes</category>
	<dc:creator>frankenklein</dc:creator>
	</item>
	
	</channel>
</rss>

