|
|
Re: foundations of the nations
thomas w kavanagh (tkavanag@INDIANA.EDU)
Tue, 13 Aug 1996 18:36:03 -0500
On Tue, 13 Aug 1996, Robert Snower wrote:
> In view of the above, how do "ethnies" differ from nations? Or is "nation"
> an instance of "ethnie?" (Is that the singular of "ethnies?") It would seem
> from the above characterization of "ethnie," the latter is true.
Go read the book.
> > tribes/ethnoses *are* just as modern as the traditional nation states.
>
>
> rs:
> I am wondering "just as modern" in what sense. Just as ancestral, as old in
> origin? One cannot be construed as developing out of the other? Or do you
> mean simply both of them make their appearance on the contemporary scene?
> Are they perhaps different cultural arrangements, equally old, with a common
> origin?
Contemporary political organizations, whether ethnic group, tribe, or
nation, are adaptations to contemporary conditions. They do not exist
apart from those conditions. Tribes are no more "traditional" than are
nation-states, and nation-states are no more "modern" than are tribes.
>
> What do you feel characterizes the difference between "ethnicity/tribalism",
> or whatever term you prefer, and the "traditional nation state?"
In the current frame of reference:
nothing
What is the difference between a traditional tribe and a traditional
nation state? a modern tribe and a modern state? a modern tribe and a
traditional nation state? a traditional tribe and a modern nation state.
nothing
to quote a famous scholar:
Contemporary political organizations, whether ethnic group, tribe, or
nation, are adaptations to contemporary conditions. They do not exist
apart from those conditions.
tk
|