Alex Salmond to let 16-year-olds vote in bid to secure independence

[Valmy]

The French Republic seems a rather particular example too, given the nature of French nationalism and identity and the way that's been tied into 'republicanism'.  That could possibly havehad a cultural effect on Quebec?

But I'd say France is a different example than relatively accidental nations like Britain, Belgium, Spain or even Italy.

Nothing accidental about Italy.  'Italy has been made; now it remains to make Italians'

[Barrister]

The French Republic seems a rather particular example too, given the nature of French nationalism and identity and the way that's been tied into 'republicanism'.  That could possibly havehad a cultural effect on Quebec?

But I'd say France is a different example than relatively accidental nations like Britain, Belgium, Spain or even Italy.

What is accidental about Italy?

Together with Germany, they were quite deliberately created in the 19th century.

[Sheilbh]

What is accidental about Italy?

Together with Germany, they were quite deliberately created in the 19th century.

So was Belgium.  I feel Italy's creation was more due to lucky outside circumstances than Germany's.  I also think there must be some distance because I don't know of any serious internal fissues in Germany like they have in Italy.  But really I was just being careless :sadblush:

[Ideologue]

So, Ide...would you like to commission a map?

Why would I need to commission you to use the fill command in Photoshop six times?  It would essentially be a special, and rather handy, case of lineart coloring, which I do all the time.

[Ideologue]

The French Republic seems a rather particular example too, given the nature of French nationalism and identity and the way that's been tied into 'republicanism'.  That could possibly havehad a cultural effect on Quebec?

But I'd say France is a different example than relatively accidental nations like Britain, Belgium, Spain or even Italy.

What is accidental about Italy?

Together with Germany, they were quite deliberately created in the 19th century.

Why would you unite with the Two Sicilies on purpose?

[Valmy]

Why would you unite with the Two Sicilies on purpose?

Because in Napoli love is king.

[Viking]

Why would you unite with the Two Sicilies on purpose?

Because you are a Guiscard?

[Ideologue]

[The Minsky Moment]

States, institutions, constitutions were designed. But nations? This makes most sense if one takes the legalistic point of view of nations as states. And, indeed, there is a great temptation to make the slippage between states and nations, but I hold the terms to be dissimilar. And while nations can display themselves in various ways, can partake in shared mythologies, and projects, they do not seem to me to be "designed" (which suggests the idea of an author). Political projects can certainly give rise to a nation, but so does military conquest, acts of resistance, religious affiliation, etc. In most cases, it is precisely the interplay between self-identification and political definition that shape nations.

This is stepping in a terminological morass.  Medievals might speak of a "nation" as referring to a group of people of roughly common regional origin living as expatriates, as in a university or a trading comptoir or a banking house.  But that is not the usage you are proposing.  In modern parlance, nation and state are inextricably tied - not all states are necessarily nations, but every nation is either a state or has claims or pretensions to be one.  The usage you propose here is not merely imprecise, it begs the question by confounding nationality with other, unspecified forms of possible cultural identity.

To get straight to the concerete example that has viper exercised, the French-speaking inhabitants of Quebec can claim to be a nation not because of shared history or cultural characteristics -- many groupings of people can claim to that without constituting a "nation" in the way that any modern would understand - but because they have mobilized behind a political project that seeks to make that commonality, whether real or mythical, the basis for a form of political organization.

[jimmy olsen]

So, Ide...would you like to commission a map?

Why would I need to commission you to use the fill command in Photoshop six times?  It would essentially be a special, and rather handy, case of lineart coloring, which I do all the time.

That's boring.

Here's your Anglo-American Confederation, Viper's South American Federation and some random stuff. Superstates ftw!



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

[Barrister]

The Phillipines as part of the anglo union?

Indonesia / Thsiland / Burma / India???

Taiwan / Japan?

Israel as part of Europe???

What are you smoking Tim?

[MadImmortalMan]

Israel as part of Europe???

Germany was starting to need lebensraum again.

[Valmy]

Israel as part of Europe???

I like how Cyprus gets taken over by the super Kaliphate thingy.

[Oexmelin]

This is stepping in a terminological morass.  Medievals might speak of a "nation" as referring to a group of people of roughly common regional origin living as expatriates, as in a university or a trading comptoir or a banking house.  But that is not the usage you are proposing.  In modern parlance, nation and state are inextricably tied - not all states are necessarily nations, but every nation is either a state or has claims or pretensions to be one.  The usage you propose here is not merely imprecise, it begs the question by confounding nationality with other, unspecified forms of possible cultural identity.

I am merely reminding you that nation and state are not synonymous. States have benefited, and were shaped, from the clarity of many discourses on their very nature and origin. Nations never had that luxury - and the very medieval definition you evoke precisely became bounded around self-identification and political definition (here: jurisdiction and representation). I am, of course, in agreement on the example of Quebec, or Palestine - that their claim to nationhood is tied with their political aspirations. I am stepping short of equating political aspirations with state, simply because I think that a nation - in modern parlance - can exist by virtue of such aspirations (and not necessarily by the effectuation of such aspirations), that it can exist in various forms of states (in itself, a problematic term), and that it can exist in various political configurations (i.e., empires, bi-national states) which are not synonymous with, say, the 19th c. Nation-State.

There will ever be a fuzziness to the definition, if only because it relies on "imagined communities", to borrow from B. Anderson. This ensures that modern nations might aim for a state to mold themselves, and to fashion it to their liking, but they never completely dissolve in it. Which is why one can attack, reform, modify, the State in the name of the Nation.

[Oexmelin]

The French Republic seems a rather particular example too, given the nature of French nationalism and identity and the way that's been tied into 'republicanism'.  That could possibly havehad a cultural effect on Quebec?

But I'd say France is a different example than relatively accidental nations like Britain, Belgium, Spain or even Italy.

AFAICT, French republicanism had a very limited cultural influence in Quebec. With its anticlerical bent, first in 1792, and then in 1905, it was denounced in French Canada, paradoxically helping to secure a distinct national identity.

What seems to remain, however, is a different "echo" of the word nation in French and English.