Talk:Nation building
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
It is nonsense to merge it to nation building because states also can exist without nations!! (elementary in human and state history!!)
The article should definitively not be merged into nation-building, as that term is only used in the American context, the more general term of art is 'state-building'.
I agree Although many writers write 'nation building' when what they might objectively be better viewed as 'state building' (since they are refering mainly to the creation of a state appartus, and less to development of a national identity) the articles should not be merged because the divergence clearly exists in the subject's literature. Wiki shouldn't clearify issues that are not in fact clear.
I agree that these pages should not be merged. The theoretical concept of “the state” and “the nation” are distinct with the former denoting functions and institutions such as the legitimate use of violence and the judiciary. Whereas the latter demotes an imagined community created through shared identity around things such as language or cultural heritage creating a sense of “nationhood”. Therefore, as mentioned above a nation can exist without a state, and building a state does not mean the same as building a nation.
