5 ms·

>in order to nationalize their power they would first need to be a nation A nation is a social construct that California could certainly fit into. Hell, Jerry

>in order to nationalize their power they would first need to be a nation A nation is a social construct that California could certainly fit into. Hell, Jerry Brown called it one. Examples of nations: Palestine, the Kurdish nation, Tibet. The legal construct is called statehood. States can bind themselves into larger legal entities by giving up some of their own rights. Examples include: the US federal government, the European Union, and the United Kingdom.

chrisco255 7y ago
Sorry, no. A nation is a legal construct, and California is not a sovereign nation. If it's a social construct then I'm founding my own nation tomorrow. I don't know anything about Jerry Brown but he doesn't sound very bright.
- selimthegrim 7y ago
  I believe J. Biafra wrote a song or two you might want to look into
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- CameronNemo 7y ago
  >A nation is a stable community of people, formed on the basis of a common language, territory, history, ethnicity, or psychological make-up manifested in a common culture. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation I studied these topics at a university level. A nation is not a legal entity. Sovereignty is a legal property, and it can be applied to nations.
  - chrisco255 7y ago
    California is part of the United States. The nation is United States. Sorry, I know Texans and Californians both think they're big enough to be exceptions, but they're still just states. The stable community is the USA. We share highways, military resources, language, government, traditions, laws, etc. This is a ridiculous argument.
    - briandear 7y ago
      Interestingly, the Texas grid is independent.
    - CameronNemo 7y ago
      >The stable community is the USA I highly disagree with this sentiment. Very few of the US institutions are well designed, and I suspect that there will be a decline of American hegemony worldwide.
    - perl4ever 7y ago
      People can, and frequently do, make distinctions between nations and states. Hence the term "nation-state" to refer to those nations which are also states. If there wasn't a distinction, the combined term wouldn't be necessary.
- anigbrowl 7y ago
  You're hung up on a silly semantic argument about the correct term for a state takeover of a utility. Jerry Brown was Governor of California, for four terms, and not knowing who he is in this context seems rather ignorant.
- nostrademons 7y ago
  A nation is a group of people with a common culture, identity, and usually language. A state is a legal construct implying self-governance and monopoly of force. "Nation" has become colloquially synonymous with "nation-state", which lead to your confusion. But the legal aspect is from the "state" part, not the "nation" part. There have been historical states (eg. the Holy Roman Empire, Hapsburg Austrian Empire, Ottoman empire) that were not nations, and there are present day nations (the grandparent mentioned some: Palestine, Kurdistan, Tibet, as well as Basques, Zulus, and others) that are not states. Some present day nation-states (eg. Germany & Italy) were nations since medieval times but did not achieve unified statehood until quite recently (1871). The U.S. started as a state (technically, 13 states and one federated government) but did not really become a nation until after the Civil War. If you can convince other people to identify with you, you absolutely can found your own nation. It won't be a state, though, so while might have your own customs good luck on having your own laws.
  - sseveran 7y ago
    The US was most definitely a nation before the Civil War. And the Civil War was waged to prevent people that identified with each other from founding their own nation.

chrisco255 7y ago

Sorry, no. A nation is a legal construct, and California is not a sovereign nation. If it's a social construct then I'm founding my own nation tomorrow. I don't know anything about Jerry Brown but he doesn't sound very bright.

selimthegrim 7y ago
I believe J. Biafra wrote a song or two you might want to look into
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
CameronNemo 7y ago
>A nation is a stable community of people, formed on the basis of a common language, territory, history, ethnicity, or psychological make-up manifested in a common culture. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation I studied these topics at a university level. A nation is not a legal entity. Sovereignty is a legal property, and it can be applied to nations.
- chrisco255 7y ago
  California is part of the United States. The nation is United States. Sorry, I know Texans and Californians both think they're big enough to be exceptions, but they're still just states. The stable community is the USA. We share highways, military resources, language, government, traditions, laws, etc. This is a ridiculous argument.
  - briandear 7y ago
    Interestingly, the Texas grid is independent.
  - CameronNemo 7y ago
    >The stable community is the USA I highly disagree with this sentiment. Very few of the US institutions are well designed, and I suspect that there will be a decline of American hegemony worldwide.
  - perl4ever 7y ago
    People can, and frequently do, make distinctions between nations and states. Hence the term "nation-state" to refer to those nations which are also states. If there wasn't a distinction, the combined term wouldn't be necessary.
anigbrowl 7y ago
You're hung up on a silly semantic argument about the correct term for a state takeover of a utility. Jerry Brown was Governor of California, for four terms, and not knowing who he is in this context seems rather ignorant.
nostrademons 7y ago
A nation is a group of people with a common culture, identity, and usually language. A state is a legal construct implying self-governance and monopoly of force. "Nation" has become colloquially synonymous with "nation-state", which lead to your confusion. But the legal aspect is from the "state" part, not the "nation" part. There have been historical states (eg. the Holy Roman Empire, Hapsburg Austrian Empire, Ottoman empire) that were not nations, and there are present day nations (the grandparent mentioned some: Palestine, Kurdistan, Tibet, as well as Basques, Zulus, and others) that are not states. Some present day nation-states (eg. Germany & Italy) were nations since medieval times but did not achieve unified statehood until quite recently (1871). The U.S. started as a state (technically, 13 states and one federated government) but did not really become a nation until after the Civil War. If you can convince other people to identify with you, you absolutely can found your own nation. It won't be a state, though, so while might have your own customs good luck on having your own laws.
- sseveran 7y ago
  The US was most definitely a nation before the Civil War. And the Civil War was waged to prevent people that identified with each other from founding their own nation.