EU4: Please add more historical accurate practice of political theory

[Evie HJ]

Presumably, nationhood would follow cultural lines. That is, the idea of nationhood wouldn't be about "we are one nation" - it would be about "We are part of this nation, which should be united! (under us).

In which case it would presumably be the way to get the old nationalism CB of EU3.

 

[Merrick Chance']

Presumably, nationhood would follow cultural lines. That is, the idea of nationhood wouldn't be about "we are one nation" - it would be about "We are part of this nation, which should be united! (under us).

In which case it would presumably be the way to get the old nationalism CB of EU3.

Now that I think about it, should EU4 limit the nationhood NI to only one-per-cultural group? It doesn't make sense, as I said, to have Tuscany, Sienna, Modena, and Ancona all with the nationhood idea all living together peacefully.

 

[Chamboozer]

I don't think such a thing should exist at all. The will of the common people is barely represented as it is, it would be a bit awkward to start on it by introducing nationhood which is effectively working backwards from the end of the timeline.

 

[Grubnessul]

It's still not clear to me. If a nation state is also a sovereign state then all the attributes of a sovereign state are a subset of the attributes of a nation state... so a nation state is a sovereign state and more. What more is a nation state that a sovereign state isn't? Presumably it's possible to have a sovereign state that is not a nation state. Chamboozer's earlier post stated that "A sovereign state is a state over which there is no higher authority, in other words it is politically independant."; what more conditions does a state have to fullfill before being upgraded from sovereign state to nation state?

A state is a territory with a permanent population, a government which is more or less into power and the capability of entering into international relations.

A nation is a political construct giving people the feeling they belong together due to common language/history/culture/decent/etc.; they have the feeling they have a shared identity.

For a state to be a nation-state, these two have to coincide. So France is a nation-state; there is the French nation coinciding with the French state. The UK is not a nation-state, it is a state containing the English, Scottish, Welsh and North-Irish nations.

 

[Seli]

A state is a territory with a permanent population, a government which is more or less into power and the capability of entering into international relations.

A nation is a political construct giving people the feeling they belong together due to common language/history/culture/decent/etc.; they have the feeling they have a shared identity.

For a state to be a nation-state, these two have to coincide. So France is a nation-state; there is the French nation coinciding with the French state. The UK is not a nation-state, it is a state containing the English, Scottish, Welsh and North-Irish nations.

I think it is a historical accident the occitans, bretons, alsatians, corsicans, flemmings etc are forced to agree (if they actually do). All 'nations' are as artificial as states.

 

[Grubnessul]

I think it is a historical accident the occitans, bretons, alsatians, corsicans, flemmings etc are forced to agree (if they actually do). All 'nations' are as artificial as states.

As I said, it's a political construct, created by flags and other symbols, language and education. Would the French state never have conquered/inherited those peoples and would they successfully have created their own nationalist symbols, we would not have spoken of a French nation, but of these smaller nations. So yes, nations are a historical accident. Of course nation building is not always as efficient as in France, take the Kurds, Scots or Basques for example.

In this regard, the nation-state can be seen as the next evolutionary stage of the state as nationalism makes it much easier for a state to recruit soldiers, levy taxes and in general tie the loyalty of the population to itself.

 

[ANO1453]

I think it is a historical accident the occitans, bretons, alsatians, corsicans, flemmings etc are forced to agree (if they actually do).

And that why people don't use France as an example of nation-state.

All 'nations' are as artificial as states.

Nations are as artificial as culture.

In this regard, the nation-state can be seen as the next evolutionary stage of the state as nationalism makes it much easier for a state to recruit soldiers, levy taxes and in general tie the loyalty of the population to itself.

Uh?