5 ms·

> nations are a completely artificial social construct But if nations aren't simply social constructs, what are they? Is it the word "artificial" that is so su

• deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
• CJefferson 9y ago
  I think you have to continue to the second part of that sentence.
• defen 9y ago
  > if nations aren't simply social constructs, what are they? A Schelling point for coordinated actions by large groups of people, organized around ethnic, cultural, and/or linguistic grounds?
  • klank 9y ago
    Had to look up "Schelling point", so apologies if I'm not fully grasping what you mean by it. However, "organized around ethnic, cultural, and/or linguistic grounds" seems like another way of saying "social construct". If you were to compare and contrast what you suggest with a social construct how would they be different?
    • defen 9y ago
      Too often I see people argue "X is a social construct" as a way of arguing that X "doesn't exist", or that people who believe in it have a kind of false consciousness. I'm trying to show why people believe in it. Yes, it's a social construct; but that doesn't mean it's worthless - "money" is also a social construct: it only has value because other people think it has value. The nation appears to be the largest stable unit of organization humans are capable of, at present at least. The history of the world has shown that Empires don't last too long these days.
• NPV_Computers 9y ago
  Yes, the problem is with the "artificial" part. Lots of things are social constructs but that does not that mean that you can dismiss them as automatically illegitimate.
  • chowchowchow 9y ago
    Who said illegitimate? I take artificial in this context to mean not inherent, so like if you ran history over again the nations people have organized into over the centuries would be different.
    • ZoeZoeBee 9y ago
      Tribalism is a lot more inherent than many people on this site give credence to
    • sbmassey 9y ago
      The second part of the statement was "and as such all immigration policies of any sort are illegitimate and harmful.", which seems to be being ignored by those who want to claim that the fellow was unreasonably complaining about nations being considered as social constructs.
• mnglkhn2 9y ago
  Is there something in our societies that is not a social construct?! Everything is a social construct if we live in a society. The alternative would be to leave in an animalic state. These arguments that "such-and-such is a social construct" are akin to "water is wet." Just a statement of fact with no obvious implications.
• sbmassey 9y ago
  I don't think anyone disputes that nations are social constructs, it is the "and as such all immigration policies of any sort are illegitimate and harmful." part that is controversial.
• ashark 9y ago
  It's not very useful to stress that they're "artificial" unless you're trying to introduce the term for rhetorical effect, say, edging it into the discussion on narrow or technical but not especially useful or broad applicability, relying on implications of the word or other, far less relevant meanings or shades of meaning to have an effect on listeners/readers. This happens a lot, especially in political discussion. It's sloppy as hell and should put you on high alert if you catch someone doing it, especially if they should know better.
• the-dude 9y ago
  It is not so much interesting in what nations actually 'are'. What would the alternative be?
• carry_bit 9y ago
  Nations are the extended family writ large. They are no more social constructs than the family is a social construct. You might be confusing 'nation' with 'nation-state'; not all states are nation-states.
  • infinite8s 9y ago
    There is a major difference - you likely don't share blood relations with every member of a nation. So they aren't quite like a giant extended family.