Nations vs Countries (Philosophical Distinction)
Summary
TLDRThis video from carnegies.org delves into the nuanced differences between nations and countries, explaining that while 'country' and 'state' are often used interchangeably, 'nation' refers to a community sharing a common culture or ethnicity. It explores the concept of nation-states, where governance aligns with cultural or ethnic identity, and raises questions about whether all nations should have their own states. The discussion touches on the benefits of diverse societies versus the potential for ethnic or cultural separation, setting the stage for further exploration in upcoming videos.
Takeaways
- 📚 In political philosophy, 'nation', 'country', and 'state' have distinct meanings, unlike in casual conversation where they are often used interchangeably.
- 🏛️ A 'country' or 'state' is defined by its political power and sovereignty, being a government with control over its citizens' internal and external affairs.
- 🌐 The terms 'state' and 'country' are generally synonymous, except when referring to individual states within a federation like the United States.
- 🏞️ A 'nation' is a more amorphous concept, referring to a community sharing a common culture or ethnicity, which may or may not align with country borders.
- 👥 The 'nation of Japan', for example, consists of people sharing a common cultural and ethnic heritage, whereas the 'country of Japan' refers to its governance structure.
- 🌐 There can be nations without countries, such as the Kurdish people who share a common heritage but lack a state representing that identity.
- 🌟 A 'nation-state' is a country where governance aligns with the cultural or ethnic identity of its people, either through shared values, beliefs, or ethnicity.
- 🌱 The concept of nation-states raises questions about whether all nations should have their own states, balancing the idea of self-governance against the benefits of cultural integration.
- 🤔 The video series will explore different perspectives on nationalism, considering whether the world should be organized by ethnicity or culture or if pluralistic and diverse societies are preferable.
- 💭 The discussion invites viewers to consider their stance on whether ethnic or cultural nations should have their own states and the implications of such arrangements for global society.
Q & A
What is the primary difference between 'nation' and 'country' in political philosophy?
-In political philosophy, 'country' or 'state' refers to a political entity with a high degree of sovereignty, which is essentially a government with control over its citizens' internal and external affairs. A 'nation,' on the other hand, is a community that shares a common culture or ethnicity, which may or may not align with country borders.
Why are the terms 'state' and 'country' often used interchangeably in everyday language?
-The terms 'state' and 'country' are used interchangeably because they generally refer to the same concept of a political entity with governance over a defined territory and population. However, 'state' can also specifically refer to individual states within a federal system like the United States.
Can you provide an example of a state that might be debated as to whether it qualifies as a 'country' due to lack of central power?
-Somalia is mentioned as a borderline case where there isn't a single entity with sufficient power over its citizens, leading to debates over whether it can be considered a 'country' or 'state' in the traditional sense.
How does the concept of a 'nation' differ from that of a 'state' or 'country'?
-A 'nation' is a more amorphous concept, referring to a community that shares a common culture or ethnicity. It does not necessarily have to correspond with political borders and can exist within, across, or outside of countries.
What is an example of a nation that is not associated with a specific state?
-The Kurdish people are given as an example of a nation without a state, as they share a common heritage but do not have a state that centralizes their ethnic and cultural identity.
How can a single person be part of multiple nations?
-A person can be part of multiple nations due to various factors such as having multiple ethnicities or cultures, being raised in different cultures, or experiencing and adopting various cultural practices throughout their life.
What is a 'nation-state' and how does it combine the concepts of 'nation' and 'country'?
-A 'nation-state' is a country that is bound together by a common nationality, which can be based on shared ethnicity, cultural beliefs, or values. It aligns the governance with the cultural or ethnic identity of its people.
Can you explain the concept of a theocratic nation-state as mentioned in the script?
-A theocratic nation-state is one where membership is based on adherence to a set of religious principles, rather than ethnicity or cultural heritage. It allows for the integration of people from diverse backgrounds who accept these principles.
What are the ethical questions raised by the discussion on nationalism in the script?
-The script raises questions about whether all nations should have their own states, whether the world should be separated by ethnicity or culture, and whether diverse and pluralistic societies are stronger due to the integration of different cultures and ethnicities.
What are the potential arguments for and against the establishment of separate states for distinct ethnic or cultural groups?
-Arguments for separate states include the right to self-governance and cultural preservation, while arguments against include the potential for division, the benefits of cultural integration, and the spread of wealth and prosperity through diversity.
Outlines
🌐 Understanding the Difference Between Nations and Countries
This paragraph delves into the nuanced differences between nations and countries as understood in political philosophy. It clarifies that while 'nation,' 'country,' and 'state' are often used interchangeably in casual conversation, they have distinct meanings within the field. A 'state' or 'country' is defined by its governmental power and sovereignty, referring to a political entity with the capacity to govern its citizens' internal and external affairs. Examples such as the UK, China, the US, and the Gambia illustrate this concept. The paragraph also touches on the debate over whether regions like Somalia can be considered a 'state' due to the lack of a unified governing power. In contrast, a 'nation' is described as a community sharing a common culture or ethnicity, which may or may not align with the borders of a 'country.' The example of Japan is used to differentiate between the government (country/state) and the people sharing a cultural and ethnic heritage (nation). The paragraph further discusses how nations can exist without a corresponding state and how one country can host multiple nations, as is the case with the Kurdish people and the Senegambia region.
🏛️ The Concept of Nation-States and Nationalism
The second paragraph expands on the idea of nation-states, which are countries unified by a shared nationality, either through common ethnicity or shared cultural values and beliefs. It explores the implications of this unity, suggesting that nation-states can be formed based on heritage or on adopted cultural practices and beliefs. The paragraph uses the example of theocratic nations to illustrate how individuals can become part of a nation through adherence to certain principles, regardless of their ethnic background. It also raises critical questions about the relationship between nations and states, such as whether every nation should have its own state. The discussion points out the potential benefits of both homogeneous nation-states and diverse, pluralistic societies. It poses the ethical and political dilemmas of whether nations without states should be granted autonomy or whether integration and multiculturalism should be encouraged. The paragraph sets the stage for further exploration of these issues in the subsequent videos of the series, inviting viewers to consider and discuss the complexities of nationalism and statehood.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Nationalism
💡Nation
💡Country
💡State
💡Sovereignty
💡Ethnicity
💡Cultural Identity
💡Nation-State
💡Pluralism
💡Self-Determination
Highlights
The terms 'nation', 'country', and 'state' are often used interchangeably in colloquial speech but have distinct meanings in political philosophy.
In political philosophy, 'state' and 'country' are generally synonymous, except when referring to states within the USA.
A 'state' is defined as a political entity with a high degree of sovereignty, essentially a government with control over its citizens.
The concept of a 'country' is tied to governance structures with sufficient power, such as the UK, China, the US, or the Gambia.
There can be debates over whether places like Somalia qualify as a 'country' due to lack of centralized power.
A 'nation' is a community that shares a common culture or ethnicity, which may or may not overlap with a 'country'.
The nation of Japan is distinguished from its government, with the former being the people sharing cultural and ethnic heritage.
Some citizens may not be part of the nation they reside in due to cultural or heritage differences.
Nations can be defined by beliefs, cultural practices, or ethnic connections, and they can exist without a corresponding state.
The Kurdish people are an example of a nation without a state, sharing a common heritage but lacking a centralized government.
Nations can overlap, as seen in the Senegambia region, where a broad culture encompasses multiple states and ethnic nations.
An individual can belong to multiple nations due to factors like multiple ethnicities, cultures, or experiences.
A 'nation-state' is a country bound together by a common nationality, aligning governance with cultural or ethnic identity.
Nation-states can be based on shared ethnicity, shared national culture, or even religious principles.
Not all countries are nation-states, and some are purposefully diverse, with borders drawn by colonial powers.
The discussion raises questions about whether all nations should have states and the implications for pluralist societies.
Arguments are presented for and against nations having their own states based on ethnicity or culture.
The series will explore the positions on nationalism, questioning the value of ethnic and cultural separation versus integration.
Transcripts
welcome back to carnegies.org today
we're going to be continuing with our
series dumped out big definitions
dizzying distinctions and diabolical
doctrines a series starting through some
of the jargon of philosophy
in this video we're going to be
continuing our mini series on what is
nationalism looking at the difference
between nations
and countries now in colloquial speech
the terms
nation country and state are often used
interchangeably
within political philosophy however the
terms state and country are
generally used synonymously with the
exception of referring to specific
states within
the united states of america for example
but generally
the definitions of state and country
will be used interchangeably for
americans think of your secretary of
state isn't worried about the individual
states he's worried about
matters of state as in talking to other
countries
so however there is a real distinction
made between
nations and countries within political
philosophy
so a country or state is designated
based on the
level of power of the institution
according to the scp
a state is a political entity with a
high degree of
sovereignty basically it is a government
with a sufficiently high level of
control
over the internal and external affairs
of its citizens
this is what we commonly think of when
we talk about a
country whether it's the uk china the us
or the gambia when you're looking at a
map and you see the things that are
divided
by borders you're usually talking about
a country because
that is identifying the governance
structures that have
a sufficient amount of power to have
power over their citizens now there may
be arguments about whether a place like
somalia is actually a country because
there's not
a single entity that has power
sufficient power over its citizens to
really be called
a state but those those are
borderline cases the general cases that
we can think of of
something like canada there's there's a
clear idea of what we're thinking about
when we're talking about a state
now nations are something different
nations on the other hand are more
amorphous they're communities that share
a common culture
or ethnicity these can overlap with
countries but not always
the country of japan for example is the
government that has power over its
people
while the nation of japan is the people
in that country that share
a common cultural and ethnic heritage
some citizens of the country of japan
may not be part of the nation
of japan due to a lack of common culture
or heritage and different nations to
find themselves in different ways
some nations may define themselves based
on
their set of beliefs or their cultural
beliefs whereas
others may define themselves explicitly
ethnically in terms of
a biologic or hereditary connection to
certain people
or individuals in the past
now there are often nations without
countries
and countries with many nations within
them
the kurdish people are arguably a nation
without a state
they share a common heritage but there
is no state
that takes that ethnic and cultural
identity as its central
feature nations can overlap as well
people from the senegambia region
share a similar unique culture
in a broad sense and therefore may be
considered a single nation
within that nation there are two states
or governments
senegal and the gambia and multiple
ethnically defined nations
within that kind of broad nation of
senegambia
such as wolofs mandinkas fulas
et cetera a single person may be part of
multiple nations due to a range of
factors such as
multiple having multiple ethnicities or
cultures someone
with parents from different ethnicities
or who was raised in multiple cultures
traveling around and experiencing
different things
layered ethnicities someone might
identify as ethnically welsh
but also ethnically british and
ethnically white
in ever enlarging spheres of ethnicities
or overlaps of culture and ethnicity
someone might identify as culturally
french
but ethnically black
nation states are countries which are
bound together by
a common nationality so moving on from
our ideas of a definition of a nation
versus a definition of a country
or state you have also things that are
considered a nation-state the idea that
you have
a combination of both your nation your
cultural or ethnic identity
and your governance that you are
governed by
something that is aligned with your
cultural or ethnic identity either
through
the ethics that they have the values
that they practice because those are in
line with the cultural beliefs that you
have
or simply because they are
representative of the ethnicities or
populations that exist within your
culture
nation states are countries that are
bound together by a common nationality
depending on what that means this may be
a shared
national ethnicity where only
individuals who share common ancestry
can be citizens
conversely it may be a shared national
culture where the distinguishing fact is
one's values beliefs and cultural
practices
not one's heritage that binds the
country together and
those beliefs and values someone may
newly adopt those beliefs and values and
therefore start being considered a part
of that nation
you might think of a religious or
theocratic nation as an example of this
of something where
someone may come in and accept those
religious principles
and therefore regardless of kind of
their previous ethnic background or even
cultural background
they're accepted into that nation
because they have
adopted or accepted that set of beliefs
that is a requisite part of being part
of that nation
so not all countries are bound together
by shared ethnicity or culture
or the culture that they have that does
bind them together may be comparatively
weak to the actual
to the stronger cultural bonds of
nations that exist within them
or expand beyond their borders many
were drawn arbitrarily by colonial
powers or are purposefully collections
of many different
cultures and ethnicities
so this discussion raises questions of
whether or not
all nations should be given states to
govern themselves
this is the second question that we'll
be looking at in our three positions for
the rest of the series
should the world be separate by
ethnicity or culture
or should we strive for more pluralist
and diverse societies
one might think that all nations without
a state
deserve a country of their own
because otherwise they're being governed
and judged and possibly put in prison by
members of a different nation who might
not share their cultural beliefs or
ideals
however one might conversely think that
the integration of diverse cultures
makes a society stronger and that by
bringing nations and countries and
nations and cultures together
rather a country will grow strong
because
it will be the people that govern it and
have power will be from many nations and
many different cultures
and therefore bring those perspectives
to bear on policy problems that are
presented to them
someone might think someone that thinks
that the kurds should have a state
based on their ethnicity because we
think that you should be allowed to have
nation states based on ethnicity
may also be committed to the claim that
norwegians should be able to expel
anyone from norway that isn't ethnically
norwegian and ban immigration someone
that believes immigration and
naturalization is good because it
spreads wealth and prosperity
around to nations that are
traditionally and historically
disadvantaged
may also be committed to the claim that
ethnic groups
that have never had a state should not
have one
and should simply integrate with other
ethnicities
because if they were given a state it
would further
separate the population divide people
and build barriers between people as
opposed to bringing individuals together
so those are some of the ideas that
we're going to be tackling with we're
going to dig into them in a lot more
detail in the next three videos
but that's just a little bit of a taste
we'll cover the three positions on
nationalism in the remains of the series
but what for now what do you think
should all ethnic nations
have their own states what about
cultural nations should they have their
own states should there be any states
that are based on ethnicity
are there some states that should be
allowed to be based on ethnicity and
others that shouldn't
if so why offer your thoughts in the
comments below
watch this video and more here at
carneitis.org and stay
skeptical everybody
تصفح المزيد من مقاطع الفيديو ذات الصلة
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)