this post was submitted on 04 Nov 2024
924 points (97.7% liked)
People Twitter
5299 readers
1124 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a tweet or similar
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It's less of a legal distinction and more of a definition thing. He is objectively using the wrong word.
It would not be incorrect to refer to the people of Puerto Ricans as a nation by the definition of the word. The word nation does not refer to a place but a group of people.
Both words refer to both concepts.
This definition is not fully correct. A nation does not need to have a government. For example the Kurds
Yes but my point is that he’s not using the wrong word.
Edit: also Kurdistan exists
Kurdistan doesn't really have a central government like that, nor fixed or well defined borders. Keep in mind that the concept of a "Nation State" is really only a couple hundred years old.
If that counterexample doesn't satisfy you, then Somalia should. It is a country without a functioning government, which has two nations inside of them of the northern and southern Somalians which are completely different, and neither of which have any sort of unifying government.
That’s your point though, isn’t it?
The “people” and the “territory” are not the same thing, but both words “country” and “nation” are used more or less interchangeably to apply to either.
The words country and nation are absolutely not interchangeable, no matter how lay people use the terms.
You’re a prescriptivist then I take it.
They used the right word in common speak, any other word would feel out of place.