tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post894381796576476823..comments2024-03-28T17:53:43.541-04:00Comments on DarwinCatholic: Ethnic Nationalism and the End of HistoryDarwinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08572976822786862149noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-71810853380370289002011-02-03T21:54:57.853-05:002011-02-03T21:54:57.853-05:00This is especially true in cases like Kashmir wher...<em>This is especially true in cases like Kashmir where the region in question is highly desirable to everyone.</em><br /><br />Yes, and that was made much worse after Physical Graffiti was released. <br /><br />:)RLnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-86953599112889461032011-02-03T14:23:20.804-05:002011-02-03T14:23:20.804-05:00One of the big practical problems with the idea is...One of the big practical problems with the idea is that there is really no way to include everyone. The division between Pakistan and India left out the Sikhs, who were not amused, and set up for endless conflicts over the Kashmir region; and the pattern tends to be repeated in most places. Except in unusual circumstances, it's not something that can be done consistently. (This is especially true in cases like Kashmir where the region in question is highly desirable to everyone. And when several ethnic groups are in one place at all there's usually a reason for it.)Brandonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06698839146562734910noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-55672202838775622702011-02-03T13:18:37.784-05:002011-02-03T13:18:37.784-05:00I would certainly agree that country's have a ...I would certainly agree that country's have a right to exist. And as countries become more representative in their governmental forms, it's probably realistic to expect that they will try to become more unified in their culture and ethnicity. After all, in an autocracy you're basically all tied together by having the same autocrat, but in a more representative government it suddenly matters if everyone else is like you or note.<br /><br />But to the extent possible, I think it's better to avoid extending the promise that every group which can identify itself as a distinct group in some sense "deserves" it's own separate nation state. <br /><br />And at a certain point it seems like it's important to have international opinion accept the status quo in a region rather than trying to restore some particular past state. Cleaning up the mess and helping the victims, once war or disruption is over, is probably a better international activity than trying to reset things.Darwinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08572976822786862149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-41422763106753491382011-02-03T12:28:56.836-05:002011-02-03T12:28:56.836-05:00Yes, the idea of the nation-state is relatively ne...Yes, the idea of the nation-state is relatively new. There were states (political entities) and nations (ethno-linguistic cultural entities). Various many-to-one and one-to-many relationships have occurred between nations and states throughout history (cf. "Germany" for most of history vs. the Austro-Hungarian Empire, etc.).<br /><br />Yes, conflicts between nations seem unavoidable as people move and migrate, and the expectation that international (multi-state) intervention will change this seems false.<br /><br />But, nations have a right to exist. They have a right to defend themselves and the culture of their nation from extermination, don't they? Ideally this is possible without violence, war and tragedy, of course. Limiting and regulating immigration comes to mind as one method of cultural self-defense that could limit and hope to prevent both cultural extermination and war/violence.Andynoreply@blogger.com