Talk:Nation
![]() | This page is not a forum for general discussion about Nation. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Nation at the Reference desk. |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 6 sections are present. |
Edit suggestion.
[edit]"A nation is generally more overtly political than an ethnic group;[1][2]"
I propose this reads "A nation is now generally considered more political than ethnic." since this has only been true since 1960-70. For the entirety of the rest of history the opposite was true. Perhaps the line should actually reflect that now I think more on it. I will leave it to someone who is an editor here to decide, but it should definitely not read as it does as it is very misleading. Nations have always been ethnic groups, which is why First Nations is such a critical concept. 124.190.192.20 (talk) 07:00, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
- Strongly oppose This hasn't been true since 1960-70, it's been true since the emergence of nationalism in the 18th century. The central thesis of nationalism (which created the concept of nations) is that such nations should have their identity reflected in the state, or vice-versa that a state should reflect the predominant "nation" within it. These are explicitly political claims. And neither are you correct that 'nations have always been ethnic groups'. Plenty of scholarship (eg. John Armstrong and Fredrik Baath) has set out a case for distinguishing the two concepts. Yr Enw (talk) 05:31, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Simplistic
[edit]This article is overly simplistic. Nationalism did exist before the 18th-century. It also is not socially-constructed unlike race. I do think that someone should explain the difference between nation and ethnicity. Cbinetti (talk) 03:30, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
- Most historians and scholars of nationalism agree nationalism did not exist before the 18th century and that it is socially constructed. But I do agree with your last point, explaining the difference might go some way towards dispelling misconceptions like the first two. Yr Enw (talk) 05:33, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted section on Medieval Scottish nationalism
[edit]I deleted the following from the article because it was unsourced and I felt the section on Medieval nations was long enough. I am not opposed to putting it back in, so here it is:
Another example of Medieval nationalism[according to whom?] is the Declaration of Arbroath (1320), a document produced by Scottish nobles and clergy during the Scottish Wars of Independence. The purpose of the document was to demonstrate to the Pope that Scotland was indeed a nation of its own, with its own unique culture, history and language and that it was indeed an older nation than England. The document went on to justify the actions of Robert the Bruce and his forces in resisting the occupation and to chastise the English for having violated Scottish sovereignty without justification. The propaganda campaign supplemented a military campaign on the part of the Bruce, which after the Battle of Bannockburn was successful and eventually resulted in the end of England's occupation and recognition of Scottish independence on the part of the English crown. The document is widely seen as an early example of both Scottish nationalism and popular sovereignty.[by whom?] Yr Enw (talk) 14:02, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
"A nation is"... nothing per se
[edit]It by now has so many fundamentally different definitions that one cannot start with "A nation is X", unless using "an English noun" for X. The lead must reflect this from the very start, everything else is babbling and/or cheating.
The medieval Latin-speakers had one concept (at least), which still survives.
Enlightenment, followed by the French Revolution, had a very different one.
My Blut & Boden friends stick to their own.
The American tribes followed by the PC crowd have pushed trough yet another use.
The "let's please all" crowd goes with nation = self-governing country (condition: large area), or = the people living within. They've pensioned the term "nation state", only Zarathustra knows why.
So let's try to be accurate. Arminden (talk) 16:41, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
Qaum
[edit]An article Qaum pertaining to the concept in Muslim world seem to have been deleted before few weeks with little discussion as per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Qaum.
I am coming across relevant reliable refs relating that topic and not sure I can update this article in reference to Qaum? Bookku (talk) 12:02, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
Thousands years ago humanity without nations.
[edit]Thousands years ago humanity without nations. most made up few centuries ago. for example moors not exists, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moors 176.208.32.129 (talk) 06:55, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
- C-Class vital articles
- Wikipedia level-4 vital articles
- Wikipedia vital articles in Society and social sciences
- C-Class level-4 vital articles
- Wikipedia level-4 vital articles in Society and social sciences
- C-Class vital articles in Society and social sciences
- C-Class sociology articles
- High-importance sociology articles
- C-Class Ethnic groups articles
- Top-importance Ethnic groups articles
- WikiProject Ethnic groups articles
- C-Class politics articles
- High-importance politics articles
- WikiProject Politics articles
- C-Class Philosophy articles
- High-importance Philosophy articles
- C-Class social and political philosophy articles
- High-importance social and political philosophy articles
- Social and political philosophy task force articles
- C-Class country articles
- WikiProject Countries articles