Nations vs Countries (Philosophical Distinction)

Summary

This 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

00:00

🌐 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.

05:00

🏛️ 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.

Keywords

💡Nationalism

Nationalism is a political ideology that emphasizes the importance of a shared national identity. In the video, it is discussed in the context of the distinction between nations and countries. Nationalism can lead to the formation of nation-states where governance aligns with the cultural or ethnic identity of the people. The video explores the debate on whether all nations should have their own states, reflecting on the implications of nationalism for governance and cultural identity.

💡Nation

A nation refers to a community of people who share a common culture, ethnicity, or heritage. The video explains that nations are often more amorphous than countries or states and may not always align with political borders. For example, the nation of Japan is described as the people sharing a common culture and ethnicity, which may not necessarily align with the political boundaries of the country of Japan.

💡Country

A country, as used in the video, generally refers to a territory with defined political borders and a government that maintains control over its internal and external affairs. The video clarifies that while 'country' and 'state' are often used interchangeably, 'country' tends to be more about geographical and political boundaries, such as the UK or China.

💡State

In political philosophy, as discussed in the video, a state is a political entity with a high degree of sovereignty. It is characterized by having a centralized government that wields significant power over its citizens. The video notes that while 'state' and 'country' are often synonymous, 'state' specifically refers to the governing entity, like the U.S. Secretary of State dealing with foreign affairs.

💡Sovereignty

Sovereignty, as mentioned in the video, is the authority of a state or other public entity to govern itself without outside interference. It is a key attribute of a state, indicating that it has control over its internal and external affairs. The video uses the concept to differentiate states from other political entities that may not have sufficient power to be considered sovereign.

💡Ethnicity

Ethnicity in the video refers to a category of people who identify with each other based on common cultural heritage, ancestry, or genetic traits. It is a key component in defining a nation, as it can influence the formation of nation-states where the government represents a specific ethnic group. The Kurdish people are given as an example of a nation defined by ethnicity without a corresponding state.

💡Cultural Identity

Cultural identity is the sense of belonging to a cultural group, which is often characterized by shared values, beliefs, and practices. The video discusses how cultural identity can be a unifying factor for nations and can influence the formation of nation-states. It contrasts with ethnic identity, focusing more on cultural practices than on biological or hereditary connections.

💡Nation-State

A nation-state is a country whose people share a common nationality, which can be based on either ethnicity or cultural identity. The video explains that nation-states are bound together by a shared identity, which can be either through common ancestry or through shared cultural practices and values. It raises questions about the ideal relationship between nations and states and whether all nations should have their own states.

💡Pluralism

Pluralism, as touched upon in the video, is the existence of a variety of cultural, ethnic, or religious groups within a society. The video suggests that pluralism can lead to a stronger society as it brings together diverse perspectives and experiences. It contrasts with the idea of a nation-state, where there is a more homogeneous cultural or ethnic identity.

💡Self-Determination

Self-determination is the right of a people to determine their own political status and pursue their economic, social, and cultural development. The video discusses the concept in the context of whether all nations should have their own states, implying that self-determination is a key issue in debates about nationalism and the formation of states.

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