States, Nations-WPS Office
States, Nations-WPS Office
States, Nations-WPS Office
Globalization
People use the terms "States", "Nation",
and "Government" interchangeably,
thinking that they mean the same thing.
Although somewhat related, the words
have different meanings in Political
science. Several scholars have taken the
position that the term "nation" has a
racial significance as it used to describe a
body of people United by a common
descent and a common language.
Even without the preceding attributes, a group
of people may also be described as "nation"
because what is merely required of a nation is
a sense of belonging and oneness. In essence,
a nation is composed by people psychologically
United by a common will to live together.
A nation functions as a cultural and
psychological entity, in contrast to a state, which
exists as a political unit. A state possess by
sovereignty. While a nation may or may not be
possess sovereignty. Consequently, a group of
people may continue to exist as a nation even if
the nation does not possess or retain its
sovereign character.Sovereignty stands as the
most essential feature of the state.
The United Nations (UN) is neither a nation or
a state. It is an Organisation of states, hence, it
is called the United Nations Organizations
(Moten and Islam, 2008). This term refers to a
political institutions that combines the
concepts of nations and state. It refers to a
state inhabited by people who identify
themselves as nation on account of a common
culture, history,language, ethnicity, and other
factors.
The structure of the nation-state system
demands the promotion of its own interests to
the exclusion or detriment of others. To be
sure, there are instances where languages or
religions tend to coincide with state borders.
Yet, it is difficult to find a nation-state as it is
defined. Conversely, a nation may be divided
into many states.
Political scientists assert that multi-cultural or
multi-national states will have difficulty
maintaining democracy and stability. They have
observed that multi-national states are often
embroiled in deep-seated political conflict on
account of aspirations of nations to form their own
state. These states are beset by issues of legitimacy
because the people profess their loyalty to their
own group and not to the states. The state also
finds it difficult to compel citizens to obey its laws
and pay the required taxes.
To solve their dilemma, leaders attempt
to fuse the concept of state and nation.
They endeavour to fosters feelings of a
common nationhood among their
citizens to help evolve their states into
nation-states.
THE NATION
The word nation is taken from Latin words
nasci, which means born, giving the word a
racial or ethnic meaning. Etymologically,it
signifies original birthplace. It is thus generally
used to describe an ethnic, linguistic, or
cultural community or race. It may also refer to
Community of people linked by ties of blood
and relationships, a common language and
literature, common tradition and history.
A nation refers to a large group of individuals who
believe that they belong together because they share a
common identity as a people. This common identity
enables them to think of themselves as members of a
homogeneous community. Anderson (2023) pointsout
that because the citizens of even the smallest nation
will not be able to meet every other citizen, a nation is
merely an "imagine" community.
Two factors of Nation
1. There is need for a group of people to
have cohesion.
Amiel Julhasan
1.People - There must be people residing in a state which
should be sufficienly to governed and to be self
sufficience.The reason is simple:there must people to
perform the leadership role.There must also be people to
govern, serve, and defend.
Albaina Salani
Globalization
The world has shrunk with the advent of
television and even more so with social media
like Facebook. It took 50 days in 1776 for
account of the English reaction to the American
Declaration of independence to reach the shores
of the US. The British reaction to the start of the
korean war in 1950 was broadcast in America in
24 hours. British viewers and there American
counterpart across the pond saw the broadcast
of the Iraq war in 2003 at the same time.
The world changed so much that the
developed world can no longer claim to have
exclusive access mass media. Families in
developing countries now boast of owning at
least one television set. Filipinos also have
access to the world through their mobile
phone,which number in the millions. The
Chinese have more television sets than the
american. Enterprising 'cable wallahs' in poor
Indian cities put up satellite dishes on rooftop
illegally and charge neighbors affordable fees.
The facility of communication has made it
possible for people to be immediately
informed of events without being physically
present at such events. Even authoritarian
countries like china find it difficult to block
internet access.
One effect of this change in the speed of
communication is to galvanize world opinion
regarding horrific world events, like the 1989
Tienanmen Massacre. The global village has also
recoiled at the collateral damage of the civil war
in Syria, including the plight of millions of Syria
refugees. It has also expressed collective outrage
after Malala Yusuf, that brave Pakistani girl, was
nearly killed by the Taliban for just expressing her
support to the right of girls to be educated.
Another effect of the improvement in
communication is the promotion of informed
and open societies. Repressive government find
it hard to isolate their populations from
international development. Communist states,
like the isolationist North Korea, experience
difficulty blocking foreign radio broadcast
aimed at their people. Eberle (1990, pp. 194-5),
who studied the collapse of these states,
astutely observes that the changes in Eastern
Europe and the Sovier union can be attributed
to two things:
1. The triumph of communication and
2. The failure of communication