The Government's Theory Of The Nation And State
Nation and State
Nation and State are two terms that are used interchangeably by many people. This is not correct. Nation is an abstract concept where there is a union of people based on similarities in linguistic pattern, ethnic relationships, cultural heritage, or even simple geographic proximity. State on the other hand is a politically organized body of people usually occupying a definite territory, especially one that is sovereign. States govern a territory using their laws. Unlike States, Nations don’t have a political implication but rather are more social and they don’t have sovereignty. State has a defined territory, but a nation can exist without this. It just needs a common social ground. There …show more content…
It asserted that some people are ordained to rule by God. This theory Originated in Europe, the divine-right theory can be traced to the medieval conception of God’s award of temporal power to the political ruler, paralleling the award of spiritual power to the church. Before the various movements, it was the main form of government prior to the 20th century. This view is different from the Divine theory because the proponents of this theory believed that God chose a specific person and gave him the power. Even if the monarch was a tyrant, people would still have to obey his rule because this monarch is “God’s magistrate on earth”, they try and justify this by saying that God will hold the unlawful monarch accountable for his sins. This theory was used by rulers across the world. For example, In Ethiopia, the kings used this excuse to rule over the country unquestioned for their actions. Fearing God’s wrath, the people obeyed the monarch’s rule for centuries. Questioning the kings was treason and punishable by death. But with the coming of the 20th century, this has changed. Most monarchs are now ceremonial rulers, like the queen of England. The doctrine of divine right can be dangerous for both church …show more content…
I believe that nationalism has had both a positive and a negative impact. When we look at the positive impact, patriotism can be an example. Loving your country, being loyal and working hard for the betterment of your country are all positive aspects. All these are good things that people with a sense of nationalism have. But, in history, we have seen some extreme forms of nationalism such as chauvinism. Hitler and Mussolini are great examples of a nationalism that went over the limit. In the name of loving his country and believing that his blood was supreme to all others, Hitler massacred millions. This form of nationalism is the worst kind. In my opinion, this is something that is evil and is in a league of its own. I wouldn’t truly associate it with
Nation and State are two terms that are used interchangeably by many people. This is not correct. Nation is an abstract concept where there is a union of people based on similarities in linguistic pattern, ethnic relationships, cultural heritage, or even simple geographic proximity. State on the other hand is a politically organized body of people usually occupying a definite territory, especially one that is sovereign. States govern a territory using their laws. Unlike States, Nations don’t have a political implication but rather are more social and they don’t have sovereignty. State has a defined territory, but a nation can exist without this. It just needs a common social ground. There …show more content…
It asserted that some people are ordained to rule by God. This theory Originated in Europe, the divine-right theory can be traced to the medieval conception of God’s award of temporal power to the political ruler, paralleling the award of spiritual power to the church. Before the various movements, it was the main form of government prior to the 20th century. This view is different from the Divine theory because the proponents of this theory believed that God chose a specific person and gave him the power. Even if the monarch was a tyrant, people would still have to obey his rule because this monarch is “God’s magistrate on earth”, they try and justify this by saying that God will hold the unlawful monarch accountable for his sins. This theory was used by rulers across the world. For example, In Ethiopia, the kings used this excuse to rule over the country unquestioned for their actions. Fearing God’s wrath, the people obeyed the monarch’s rule for centuries. Questioning the kings was treason and punishable by death. But with the coming of the 20th century, this has changed. Most monarchs are now ceremonial rulers, like the queen of England. The doctrine of divine right can be dangerous for both church …show more content…
I believe that nationalism has had both a positive and a negative impact. When we look at the positive impact, patriotism can be an example. Loving your country, being loyal and working hard for the betterment of your country are all positive aspects. All these are good things that people with a sense of nationalism have. But, in history, we have seen some extreme forms of nationalism such as chauvinism. Hitler and Mussolini are great examples of a nationalism that went over the limit. In the name of loving his country and believing that his blood was supreme to all others, Hitler massacred millions. This form of nationalism is the worst kind. In my opinion, this is something that is evil and is in a league of its own. I wouldn’t truly associate it with