I have evidence of a sophisticated Russian information campaign to get security nerds to say "nation-state" when they just mean "state". We spent TWO LECTURE PERIODS on this subtle distinction in college geography and it all ends, like tears in the rain, so people can sound cool
-
-
But... India's government pretty clearly defines India that way. And the US? Not that far behind. It seems like a porous boundary.
-
People are complicated! That's why there's a Wikipedia article about it as long as your arm. My only point is that it's a term of art with a specific meaning, and that people saying 'nation-state' in all cases just mean 'state', which is shorter, more correct, and less jargony.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This seems dependent on a pretty restrictive definition of nationhood? US seems like a nation state to me (as of now), whereas the U.K. as a whole doesn’t, since it contains distinct nations.
-
I'm not going to argue that on the merits—I just want to point out that the *concept* of nation-state, and especially the move from medieval "bag of duchies" definitions of statehood to one defined by ethicity, race, common language, religion—is what the term exists to describe.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
It might be easier to understand if you also explain / define what a “nation” is.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Are all nation-states states? Can the term state just cover “government sponsored”?
Thanks. 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.