Scribd
Upload
26 views4 pages

Evolution of the Nation-State Concept

The nation-state is a sovereign political entity where power is held in the name of a dominant national group that identifies as a nation. Nation-states combine principles of state sovereignty over a territory and national sovereignty of a people to govern themselves. While France is often cited as the first modern nation-state, others argue England established one earlier in the 17th century. Since then, nation-states have increasingly become the dominant form of political organization globally. The formation of nation-states can increase the likelihood of wars over independence, civil conflicts, and disputes over borders between ethnic groups.

Uploaded by

Zarmina Zaid
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
26 views4 pages

Evolution of the Nation-State Concept

The nation-state is a sovereign political entity where power is held in the name of a dominant national group that identifies as a nation. Nation-states combine principles of state sovereignty over a territory and national sovereignty of a people to govern themselves. While France is often cited as the first modern nation-state, others argue England established one earlier in the 17th century. Since then, nation-states have increasingly become the dominant form of political organization globally. The formation of nation-states can increase the likelihood of wars over independence, civil conflicts, and disputes over borders between ethnic groups.

Uploaded by

Zarmina Zaid
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

Nation-state

Nation state a territorially bounded sovereign polity—i.e., a state__ that is ruled in


the name of a community of citizens who identify themselves as a nation.

The legitimacy of a nation-state’s rule over a territory and over the population
inhabiting it stems from the right of a core national group within the state (which
may include all or only some of its citizens) to self-determination. Members of the
core national group see the state as belonging to them and consider the
approximate territory of the state to be their homeland. Accordingly, they demand
that other groups, both within and outside the state, recognize and respect their
control over the state.

As the American sociologist Rogers Brubaker put it in Nationalism Reframed:


Nationhood and the National Question in the New Europe (1996), nation-states
are “states of and for particular nations.”

As a political model, the nation-state fuses two principles:

The principle of state sovereignty

First articulated in the Peace of Westphalia (1648), which recognizes the right of


states to govern their territories without external interference

The principle of national sovereignty,

Which recognizes the right of national communities to govern themselves.


National sovereignty in turn is based on the moral-philosophical principle of
popular sovereignty, according to which states belong to their peoples.

Nation-state building

Although France after the French Revolution (1787–99) is often cited as the first
nation-state, some scholars consider the establishment of the English
Commonwealth in 1649 as the earliest instance of nation-state creation.

Since the late 18th century the nation-state has gradually become the dominant
vehicle of rule over geographic territories, replacing polities that were governed
through other principles of legitimacy.
The latter included dynastic monarchies (e.g., the Habsburg and Ethiopian
empires), theocratic states (e.g., the Dalai Lama’s rule over Tibet and the rule of
the prince-bishops of Montenegro), colonial empires (justified by colonizing
powers as a means of spreading a “true” religion or of bringing progress to
“backward” peoples), and communist revolutionary governments that purported to
act in the name of a transnational working class.

Although some nation-states have been formed by polity-seeking national


movements, others have formed when existing policies were nationalized—i.e.,
transformed into nation-states—either because theocrats or monarchs ceded
authority to parliaments (as in Britain and France) or because empires retreated or
broke apart (as did the British and French colonial empires in the mid-20th century
and the Soviet empire in eastern Europe beginning in the late 1980s).

Nation-state formation and war

The processes of nation-state formation increase the likelihood of wars. As the


social scientists Andreas Wimmer and Brian Min showed in a 2006.

Three types of wars are more prevalent at approximately the time of the foundation
of nation-states:

(1) Wars of independence aiming to end foreign rule (e.g., the Algerian War of
Independence in 1954–62 and the Kosovo conflict in 1998–99)

(2) Civil wars within new nation-states arising from struggles over the states’
ethno-nationalist character, sometimes resulting in secessionist efforts by ethnic
minorities (e.g., the 1963–67 uprising of the Somalian minority in Kenya, which
demanded union of their area of residence with neighboring Somalia)

(3) Interstate wars declared by governments seeking to help oppressed co-


nationals in new neighboring nation-states (e.g., the Greco-Turkish war of 1921–
22) and by new nation-states seeking to extend their rule to neighboring territories
inhabited by co-nationals (e.g., the German conquest of Alsace-Lorraine during the
Franco-German War of 1871).

Citizenship in nation-states
Nation-states strictly enforce institutionalized criteria for naturalization, known as
citizenship regimes.

Citizenship regimes reflect specific understandings of who may be a legitimate


member of the nation. Nation-states in which the core nation is conceived as a
primordial ethno-cultural community tend to adopt citizen regimes based on a
principle of jus sanguinis (“right of blood”), which allocates citizenship based on
the individual’s organic ties (through family decent) to the national community and
the homeland. In contrast, citizenship allocation based on a principle of “jus soli”
(“right of the soil”) presupposes a civic-republican conception of the core nation,
according to which national membership depends on acquiring, through
socialization, loyalty to state institutions and acceptance of a shared political
culture.

Nationalization

The ideal of a state of and for a nation is reinforced not only through citizenship
regimes but also through mechanisms that foster national integration and develop
and sustain emotional commitment to the homeland.

Example:

Nation is represented in official state symbols (e.g., flags and the uniforms of
security forces); and, in many nation-states, the language of the core national group
is made the official language of the country.

Diversity management

Despite their efforts to foster a national core, a fundamental challenge to nation-


states is how to manage ethnic, religious, or national diversity within their borders.
So-called “diversity management” Has been accomplished by applying one or
more of three competing principles regarding groups that are not initially part of
the core national group:

 Assimilation
 Exclusion
 Accommodation
In many cases, different policies have been applied to different minority groups,
thus leading to different levels of social integration and cultural assimilation or
alienation.

Common questions

Powered by AI

The main factors leading to wars during the formation of nation-states include wars of independence, civil wars, and interstate wars. Wars of independence occur to end foreign rule, civil wars arise due to struggles over the ethno-nationalist character of new states, and interstate wars happen when governments assist oppressed co-nationals in new nation-states or seek to extend control to areas inhabited by co-nationals .

In nation-states, the jus sanguinis principle allocates citizenship based on organic ties or family descent to the national community, suitable for ethno-cultural conceptions of the core nation. Conversely, jus soli allocates citizenship based on birth in a territory, aligning with civic-republican views where national membership depends on loyalty to state institutions and a shared political culture .

The French Revolution is pivotal as it marked the transition to a model of governance that prioritized national community and self-determination, embodying the principles of popular sovereignty. This revolutionary change laid the foundation for the modern nation-state concept, emphasizing the governing of territories in the name of a unified national identity .

Ethno-nationalist struggles in new nation-states often lead to civil unrest and instability as different ethnic groups vie for power and recognition. These conflicts can manifest as secessionist movements or internal strife, challenging the core national identity and leading to political and social fragmentation .

During the mid-20th century, as colonial empires like the British and French retreated or collapsed, many regions transitioned into nation-states. This transformation involved adopting national sovereignty principles where local communities claimed self-rule, often facilitated by the withdrawal of colonial powers and the subsequent filling of political vacuums with new nation-state structures .

National symbols like flags and uniforms serve to reinforce state identity and emotional commitment to the nation. They create a shared identity and vision of belonging, thus fostering national integration and solidarity among citizens by representing the ideals and values of the national community .

The nation-state idea replaced models such as dynastic monarchies, theocratic states, colonial empires, and communist revolutionary governments. These were seen as less legitimate because they lacked the principle of popular sovereignty, where governance is based on the will of the people rather than lineage, religion, or ideology .

The principle of state sovereignty recognizes the right of states to govern their territories without external interference, first articulated in the Peace of Westphalia in 1648. In contrast, national sovereignty recognizes the right of national communities to govern themselves, based on the moral-philosophical principle of popular sovereignty, where states belong to their peoples .

Nation-states manage diversity through assimilation, exclusion, or accommodation. Assimilation absorbs minority groups into the national core. Exclusion denies minorities full participation in national life. Accommodation allows minorities cultural autonomy or political representation. These methods often result in varying degrees of social integration, cultural assimilation, or alienation .

The concept of popular sovereignty was central to nation-state formation, as it posits that political power originates from the people. This idea led to the creation of governments that are accountable to their citizens, marking a shift from monarchies and empires to self-determined nation-states where political authority is derived from national communities .

You might also like