The concept of the Nation- State is one which is completely ingrained and established into our society. We accept it unquestioningly as the dominant form of organized power in modernity, and it is popularly regarded as the only justified form of rule. This concept that there is no higher power beyond the sovereign nation-state is exemplified in the acceptance of the United Nations as the principal global political association in the world today, and the ‘right to nation-hood’ is one of our fundamental human rights. Yet, the concept of the nation- state is one which is astonishingly recent. Focusing only on human settled organisation, which emerged 12,000 years ago, the nation-state period counts for a mere less than 2% of sedentary existence. …show more content…
And what were the processes which led to their development? In this essay I am going to explain the origins of modern Nation-States, by defining and explaining the features of the modern nation-state, analysing existing theories of its formation proposed by various theorists, and exploring and examining the historical processes which have led to the development of the sovereign nation state as we know it today.
Before going into the historical processes which resulted in its formation, we must first understand the defining characteristics and the principles of the modern sovereign nation state, which makes up the system of social organisation in place today, and which therefore is the basis for the mechanisms for the functioning of our society. The development of the nation is of central importance to the formation of the state, but whilst the terms ‘nation’ and ‘state’ are regularly inter-utilized wrongly, there is in fact a vital distinction between the two. Whilst a nation is an ambiguous term, it is essentially a self-defined psychological bond which ties a group of people. A state, on the other hand is a political and geographical construction with clearly
A nation is defined as a large group of people that associate with a particular territory and is united in seeking to form a government of that area. The United States, in the Revolutionary War, fought for independence, just as many other nation-states have done so over the years. The history of a formal Scotland can be traced back to the 9th century, or earlier by some accounts. On September 18, 2014, the people of Scotland, after a very long and intense campaign, voted to stay as a part of the United Kingdom.
Social 20-1 Final Position Paper Jasvin Nijhar “ The 20th century has been, witness to countless acts of inhumanity in the name of ‘nation’. Nationalism has given voice and self-determination to many oppressed peoples but it has also given rise to racism and genocide. How do we weight the positives against the magnitude of the negative? Nationalism has a evil side and it should be the responsibility of all humanity to insure it does not rear its ugly head.” It is in common knowledge that Genocide primarily originated from Ultranationalism.
How did sectionalism contribute to the ongoing debate about the admission of states? Be sure to discuss the Missouri Compromise in your response. Sectionalism contributed to the ongoing debate about the admission of states by dividing people over the issue of slavery because different regions had different visions for the country. To begin, the north, being mainly composed of manufacturers and food farmers, favored an American economy that was based off of manufacturing. However, the south, being almost entirely composed of those who produced cash crops, favored an American economy based off of farming.
The American colonies needed to form a national government to represent them and to bring all the colonies together to stand up against British Parliament. They did this by assembling the First Continental Congress with representatives from each colony. These representatives became the decision makers for all the people. Those decisions led to the battles of Concord and Lexington, which started the American Revolution in 1775. After these battles occurred, a feeling of a major showdown was brewing between the colonies and Britain.
The U.S 's first government was created on September 17, 1787 when the US Constitution was signed. This event brought together all 13 states by a unanimous vote. With this, our new government was formed, but now that we have this new system and much more freedom, what exactly is the purpose of our government? Is it to run our businesses? make treaties? or just to say that we have one?
In the beginning, our nation- as any new nation would start- got off shaky. With tensions high in Britain, casually spreading to other European countries, trade was difficult. Not only was trade difficult, but preventing rebellion from having to form a new government no one knew how to use was also a struggle. Though we had these problems, our nation’s people persevered through the hard times. Our nation obviously overcame the new problems we faced to become one of the strongest nations in the world.
Nationalism is the pride for one’s country, the love that one has for its country and it is the want for the good of all people in the nation. This love is not conditional, it does not depend on race religion or economic standing. When a leader is chosen, when a country is coming out of great national change, this requires a particularly strong leader who only wishes for their countries greatness and success in the future. However, this can quickly turn into ultranationalism, or expose ultranationalistic motives. The two concepts of one’s love for their country have similarities, one is formed from the other, or that each can be provokers of change in either direction in the political spectrum.
It should be a nation a people that share similar and common culture and history.when a independence government forms in a nation it is called nation-state. That nation-state has to defend the nations way of life and territory. And one of its biggest roles is to represent the whole nation to the rest of the world. The general population
Nationalism has too often been dismissed as an irrational creed due to its association with disastrous results over the decades. But undeniably, it is a dominating force in contemporary international politics. It is important to understand nationalism if we want to understand global political developments. Many books have been written on this subject, but David Miller’s On Nationality stands out. This book takes on a distinctive approach to the study of nationalism, rendering it one of a kind in this field.
A nation stems from a pre-existing history. It does not require that all the members be alike but they must have a bond of solidarity to the other members of the nation. Nationalism is a movement for the attainment and maintenance of unity, identity and autonomy of a population that its members consider a nation. Nations are a product of modernity but it is likely to find ethnic elements that exist in these nations.
Extraterritorial criminal jurisdiction can in many circumstances be a useful and legitimate response to transnational crime. Criminal activity is not always confined to territorial boarders, and so the law may seek to follow the crime to prevent an offender from enjoying impunity. A number of states have included in their criminal legislature provisions allowing for the investigation and prosecution of international crimes, even when such crime is committed outside their national territory and whether or not the perpetrators or the victims are nationals of the state concerned”. The importance of extraterritorial jurisdiction was also seen in the Advisory Opinion of 11 April 1949 – Reparations for injuries suffered in the service of the United Nations. Personnel of the UN were targeted in Palestine which culminated in the assassination of
Gellner (1997) also describes the relationship between the nation and the state. The interchangeable use of nation and state deepens the contradictions that arise in the common person’s understanding of nationalism. Therefore both Anderson and Gellner take a Marxist stance that nationalism is a species of bourgeois ideology. They see nationalism as an instrument through which the ruling class controls the people and counters the threat of social revolution by emphasizing national loyalty is stronger than class solidarity.
Since,"anarchy is what states make of it,” all states do not need to stress over their relative power and can focus on achieving long term peace.(Wendt, 79-80). While realist classical perspectives point to solely human nature and the anarchical system as the reason for conflict, Wendt provides an example showing that the self identities of states can lead to peace or conflict. He points to defining situations in context history that help determine a state 's interest. He states, “This seems to be happening today in the United States and the former Soviet Union. Without the cold war’s mutual attributions of threat and hostility to define their identities, these states seem unsure of what their ‘interests’
(Young 2014:19). In addition, this framework implies that sociocultural complexity is the striking feature of the state – or, at least, characterises social groups that are in the process of becoming one. In his paper, Possehl goes against this view by
What is a perfect government? Is it an ideal place for any person? A utopia? Throughout the history of the world, there have been several different forms of government, ranging from monarchies, dictatorships, republics, and even anarchy. Respectively each of these types governments have their best and worst decisions.