<?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: Sacred Land</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.isegoria.net/2014/04/sacred-land/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.isegoria.net/2014/04/sacred-land/</link>
	<description>From the ancient Greek for equality in freedom of speech; an eclectic mix of thoughts, large and small</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 May 2026 16:29:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.6.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alrenous</title>
		<link>https://www.isegoria.net/2014/04/sacred-land/comment-page-1/#comment-1193554</link>
		<dc:creator>Alrenous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Apr 2014 01:08:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.isegoria.net/?p=34601#comment-1193554</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[So does my criticism of the first quoted section imply I don&#039;t like it overall? The impression is false, so I don&#039;t want to give it.

I repeat it anyway. 

&lt;blockquote&gt;Those that treat their core territory in a rational manner — forfeiting it in accordance with strategic imperatives, as, for example, several Germanic tribes did repeatedly during the Migration Period — get wiped out.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Getting wiped out isn&#039;t rational. Most likely they overlooked the fact you need a place to live. Or, they would have been wiped out anyway, because they couldn&#039;t defend their core territory. 

Needing to see your territory as sacred to be able to take the bourgeois/kingbird/rooster strategy is irrational. Its main flaw is inflexibility. Having devoted a couple generations to sacralizing, then if I need to move I can&#039;t reasonably do so. It&#039;s a much better idea to sacralizing something that&#039;s actually sacred, like family or community. Defend the land not because it&#039;s sacred per se, but because the people living there are.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So does my criticism of the first quoted section imply I don&#8217;t like it overall? The impression is false, so I don&#8217;t want to give it.</p>
<p>I repeat it anyway. </p>
<blockquote><p>Those that treat their core territory in a rational manner — forfeiting it in accordance with strategic imperatives, as, for example, several Germanic tribes did repeatedly during the Migration Period — get wiped out.</p></blockquote>
<p>Getting wiped out isn&#8217;t rational. Most likely they overlooked the fact you need a place to live. Or, they would have been wiped out anyway, because they couldn&#8217;t defend their core territory. </p>
<p>Needing to see your territory as sacred to be able to take the bourgeois/kingbird/rooster strategy is irrational. Its main flaw is inflexibility. Having devoted a couple generations to sacralizing, then if I need to move I can&#8217;t reasonably do so. It&#8217;s a much better idea to sacralizing something that&#8217;s actually sacred, like family or community. Defend the land not because it&#8217;s sacred per se, but because the people living there are.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
