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
-
-
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.
- Još 1 odgovor
Novi razgovor -
-
-
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.
- Još 2 druga odgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
-
-
It might be easier to understand if you also explain / define what a “nation” is.
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
-
-
Are all nation-states states? Can the term state just cover “government sponsored”?
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.