Talk:Nation

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

National day[edit]

National day 2405:204:550E:3956:0:0:12DA:F8A4 (talk) 11:37, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]