Everyone says "nation states" when they mean "states". Stop doing that.
-
Show this thread
-
ⓘ Dogs don't have thumbs Retweeted Arthur Niculitcheff
2/ Valid question! Nation = a homogenous / unified body of people. "The nation of Englishman", "the Japanese people", etc. State = government for Japan, nation = state for Soviet Union, many nations, one state for Germans, one nation, many stateshttps://twitter.com/ANiculitcheff/status/1187744147354075138 …
ⓘ Dogs don't have thumbs added,
1 reply 2 retweets 7 likesShow this thread -
ⓘ Dogs don't have thumbs Retweeted random_scrub
3/ yes! Nation states were a kind of new (rediscovered?) concept as feudalism was declining and modern nations were coalescing. No more would a German king have a small Italian province; states were organized around cohesive populations. ...briefly.https://twitter.com/random_scrub/status/1187744662339100673 …
ⓘ Dogs don't have thumbs added,
1 reply 1 retweet 8 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @MorlockP
Wonder why people became less enamored of efforts to "align" "ethnocultural" Wilsonian entities with state structures. could it have been...
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @LibertyFarmNH @MorlockP
More broadly, one problem here is that
@MorlockP seems to take states as being exogenous and "ethnocultural" formations as inherent. In fact, what people view as being key to their ethnos/culture is often articulated and propagated by states, to facilitate war/taxation/repression2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @rebelcinder @LibertyFarmNH
I do? I don't see that as being explicit or implicit in anything I said.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MorlockP @LibertyFarmNH
I'm trying to say that your contrast of the "nation" and the "state" disregards ways that states very consciously try to shape the characteristics of the nation, & ways that members of an ethnic group themselves shift their practices & relevant symbols over time.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
I understand and agree with your point, but think that it's entirely orthogonal to my point. Yes, over time a state can - MAYBE - convert two nations into one. Before that's complete, 1 state, 2 nations. After, 1 state, 1 nation. My point still holds, yes?
-
-
Replying to @MorlockP @LibertyFarmNH
Yes. I wonder whether "nation-state" should be reserved for states actively "aligning" their populations around the symbols/narratives/interests of the ethnic majority (say, Turkey & China) and "antination-state" for states actively trying to disrupt such symbols/narratives
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.