Towards a possible definition of "The Nation"

[Cael]

Following from a previous thread, Im wondering what elements would contribute towards a definition of the nation. I would say the following concepts would be necessary:

That the definition would take the cultural achievements/record of the nation into account.

That the definition would not be based on the living members alone, but also on past and future generations.

That the nation could not be a subset of another nation.

[easygoing]

Following from a previous thread, Im wondering what elements would contribute towards a definition of the nation. I would say the following concepts would be necessary:

That the definition would take the cultural achievements/record of the nation into account.

That the definition would not be based on the living members alone, but also on past and future generations.

That the nation could not be a subset of another nation.

While it's obvious that nations do exist (few who howl 'define Irishness! Can you do it? Bet you can't! Therefore, it doesn't exist and we're all just human! (But, curiously, they never seem to doubt the existence of, say, a Palestinian nation)), in order to please the pedants there is a problem with your first definition.

In order to take the cultural achievements of the nation into account, you'll first have to define the nation is, unfortunately.

Collective memory? Shared sense of experiences? Similar sense of what constitutes 'the Other'?

[Cael]

Following from a previous thread, Im wondering what elements would contribute towards a definition of the nation. I would say the following concepts would be necessary:

That the definition would take the cultural achievements/record of the nation into account.

That the definition would not be based on the living members alone, but also on past and future generations.

That the nation could not be a subset of another nation.

While it's obvious that nations do exist (few who howl 'define Irishness! Can you do it? Bet you can't! Therefore, we're all human! (But, curiously, they never seem to doubt the existence of, say, a Palestinian nation)), in order to please the pedants there is a problem with your first definition.

In order to take the cultural achievements of the nation into account, you'll first have to define the nation is, unfortunately.

Collective memory? Shared sense of experiences? Similar sense of what constitutes 'the Other'?

I think a cultural record is something which can be descerned on its own. Of course, there is a continuity between Gaelic Scotland and Gaelic Ireland, but there are destinct differences too.

[FutureTaoiseach]

I think there are 2 definitions of nationality - civic nationality (based on citizenship of the country) and ethnic nationality (based on descent). The New World countries are the former whereas the European countries are usually the latter. I prefer that we remain the latter.

[White Horse]

That the nation could not be a subset of another nation.

Yes, but is is possible that nations overlap, ie the Irish nation and the British nation overlapping in Ulster.

[FutureTaoiseach]

That the nation could not be a subset of another nation.

Yes, but is is possible that nations overlap, ie the Irish nation and the British nation overlapping in Ulster.

I disagree. It could be argued that there are 2 separate nations in the Six Counties (which are not Ulster because that's 9 counties).

[ON THE ONE ROAD]

Following from a previous thread, Im wondering what elements would contribute towards a definition of the nation. I would say the following concepts would be necessary:

That the definition would take the cultural achievements/record of the nation into account.

That the definition would not be based on the living members alone, but also on past and future generations.

That the nation could not be a subset of another nation.

While it's obvious that nations do exist (few who howl 'define Irishness! Can you do it? Bet you can't! Therefore, it doesn't exist and we're all just human! (But, curiously, they never seem to doubt the existence of, say, a Palestinian nation)), in order to please the pedants there is a problem with your first definition.

In order to take the cultural achievements of the nation into account, you'll first have to define the nation is, unfortunately.

Collective memory? Shared sense of experiences? Similar sense of what constitutes 'the Other'?

"The other" thats an interesting idea. any country would be difficult to discribe as homogonous, there all internally didived into social groups and sub groups on what ever line. do people define themselfs nationaly by what there not. Do most people define themselves nationally or are they labeled. i think your on to something with collective memory, is there a liguistic short hand in that, that others don't understand?

[QuizMaster]

If you define the nation, do you do it for yourself? Your party? Your internet friends? What if other people have other definitions?

The word "nation" means anything you want it to mean. There is no arbiter of the English language. Anyone can publish a dictionary. There is no "official" dictionary, not even the Oxford English Dictionary or, across the pond, Websters.

If you want to define it in the constitution, it will need popular support. Do you really think the opinion of the majority of the public is the final arbiter of what is right and what is wrong? I wouldn't have thought so, judging by your political opinions.

It's a tricky one.

FWIW my opinion of the nation is that it should be nothing more than a convenient unit of administration. Read "The Dispossessed" by Ursula Le Guin for more details.

[White Horse]

That the nation could not be a subset of another nation.

Yes, but is is possible that nations overlap, ie the Irish nation and the British nation overlapping in Ulster.

I disagree. It could be argued that there are 2 separate nations in the Six Counties (which are not Ulster because that's 9 counties).

You've never been to Monaghan then. There are parts that are as British as Bangor!

Actually I was referring to nations overlapping on the same landmass. I fully accept that they are different and exclusive nationalities.

Just to clarify, nations are people while Ulster is a geographical area.

[A_man_about_a_dog]

A nation can be roughly defined as a group of people who:
- Share a common language.
- Share a common religion.
- Have a shared culture.
- Have a collective agreement as to where their 'national homeland' is.
- Have a shared belief about their (ethnic) descent.
- Have a collective belief that they are a unique people who differ from other 'nations'.


There are alot more depending on where/who you get your reading from. These are just some of the grounds on which academics define a nation.

IMO, it is a tough nut to crack. I do think that a religion and a language which are common to a majority are neccesities, as is a collective agreement on a homeland. Other than that I feel the points are debatable and more could be brought in aswell as taking some away.