5 ms·

We do not even know what 'countries' there were for the past 2000 years.

by orlp 3y ago

1letterunixname 3y ago
There weren't many "countries", per se. There are artifacts from most major empires but untold numbers of city-states, villages, and small-medium settlements are lost to time. There are some finds like Los Millares in the Eneolithic, but there isn't much left of mesolithic settlements apart from about a dozen examples. In terms of proof of political organization, that requires evidence like writing or inscriptions.
- sakex 3y ago
  One could argue that the mere presence of settlements is evidence of political organisation.
  - robertlagrant 3y ago
    > One could argue that the mere presence of settlements is evidence of political organisation. This is ofuscatory, twice: 1. One could argue anything 2. presence of settlements is an indicator of political organisation, but political organisation is not a requirement for settlements
    - sakex 3y ago
      > 2. presence of settlements is an indicator of political organisation, but political organisation is not a requirement for settlements I disagree. People living next to each other need to reach a political order (organisation) even if it is tacit. A common understanding of a shared living space where you can trust your neighbour to not try to steal you or enslave you is a form of political organisation, even if no interaction between the settlers ever occur. Likewise, a settlement where the strongest people enslave the others is also a political organisation. Also, seasonal settlements where people only spend a few weeks a year also require political organisations to coordinate on the dates and logistics. Monarchy and anarchy are forms of political organisation, just like families, unions and corporations. I would agree if we were talking about _Institutionalised_ political organisation, but this statement would still be wrong: > In terms of proof of political organization, that requires evidence like writing or inscriptions. Other forms of evidence can prove institutionalised politics. For instance, the presence of shared infrastructure, palaces, temples, monuments, royal funerary sites, battles, etc.
      - robertlagrant 3y ago
        I think at this point we might just be debating the meaning of "political order". George and Lenny had an agreement and social relationship, but does that count as "political order"? (-:
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
eesmith 3y ago
For that matter, how many countries are there now? Do you recognize Palestine? Northern Cyprus? Are the People's Republic of China and Taiwan two different countries? The Democratic People's Republic of Korea does not recognize the Republic of Korea as an independent country, and vice versa. Do you? What about the Sovereign Military Order of Malta? The Republic of Kosovo?
- RugnirViking 3y ago
  the correct answer to all of these is yes, like obviously? all of those countries are countries. If you control your own territory you are a country. Transnistria, western sahara, somalialand, also. Sure there are nonsense political reasons countries' governments dont recognise these but as a regular citizen in a free country the answer is pretty clear right?
  - eesmith 3y ago
    The Sovereign Military Order of Malta has no territory. Under your definition, is Wales a country? What about Northern Ireland? Quoting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countries_of_the_United_Kingdom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countries_of_the_United_Kingdo... > Since 1922 the United Kingdom has been made up of four countries: England, Scotland, Wales (which collectively make up Great Britain) and Northern Ireland (variously described as a country,[1] province,[2][3][4][5] jurisdiction[6] or region[7][8]). The UK Prime Minister's website has used the phrase "countries within a country" to describe the United Kingdom.[9] Some statistical summaries, such as those for the twelve NUTS 1 regions of the UK, refer to Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales as "regions".[10][11] With regard to Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales particularly, the descriptive name one uses "can be controversial, with the choice often revealing one's political preferences". What about the Isle of Man? It's not part of the UK, but is a self-governing possession of the British Crown.

We do not even know what 'countries' there were for the past 2000 years.

by orlp 3y ago

We do not even know what 'countries' there were for the past 2000 years.

There weren't many "countries", per se. There are artifacts from most major empires but untold numbers of city-states, villages, and small-medium settlements are lost to time. There are some finds like Los Millares in the Eneolithic, but there isn't much left of mesolithic settlements apart from about a dozen examples. In terms of proof of political organization, that requires evidence like writing or inscriptions.

sakex 3y ago
One could argue that the mere presence of settlements is evidence of political organisation.
- robertlagrant 3y ago
  > One could argue that the mere presence of settlements is evidence of political organisation. This is ofuscatory, twice: 1. One could argue anything 2. presence of settlements is an indicator of political organisation, but political organisation is not a requirement for settlements
  - sakex 3y ago
    > 2. presence of settlements is an indicator of political organisation, but political organisation is not a requirement for settlements I disagree. People living next to each other need to reach a political order (organisation) even if it is tacit. A common understanding of a shared living space where you can trust your neighbour to not try to steal you or enslave you is a form of political organisation, even if no interaction between the settlers ever occur. Likewise, a settlement where the strongest people enslave the others is also a political organisation. Also, seasonal settlements where people only spend a few weeks a year also require political organisations to coordinate on the dates and logistics. Monarchy and anarchy are forms of political organisation, just like families, unions and corporations. I would agree if we were talking about _Institutionalised_ political organisation, but this statement would still be wrong: > In terms of proof of political organization, that requires evidence like writing or inscriptions. Other forms of evidence can prove institutionalised politics. For instance, the presence of shared infrastructure, palaces, temples, monuments, royal funerary sites, battles, etc.
    - robertlagrant 3y ago
      I think at this point we might just be debating the meaning of "political order". George and Lenny had an agreement and social relationship, but does that count as "political order"? (-:

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

eesmith 3y ago

For that matter, how many countries are there now? Do you recognize Palestine? Northern Cyprus? Are the People's Republic of China and Taiwan two different countries? The Democratic People's Republic of Korea does not recognize the Republic of Korea as an independent country, and vice versa. Do you? What about the Sovereign Military Order of Malta? The Republic of Kosovo?

RugnirViking 3y ago
the correct answer to all of these is yes, like obviously? all of those countries are countries. If you control your own territory you are a country. Transnistria, western sahara, somalialand, also. Sure there are nonsense political reasons countries' governments dont recognise these but as a regular citizen in a free country the answer is pretty clear right?
- eesmith 3y ago
  The Sovereign Military Order of Malta has no territory. Under your definition, is Wales a country? What about Northern Ireland? Quoting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countries_of_the_United_Kingdom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countries_of_the_United_Kingdo... > Since 1922 the United Kingdom has been made up of four countries: England, Scotland, Wales (which collectively make up Great Britain) and Northern Ireland (variously described as a country,[1] province,[2][3][4][5] jurisdiction[6] or region[7][8]). The UK Prime Minister's website has used the phrase "countries within a country" to describe the United Kingdom.[9] Some statistical summaries, such as those for the twelve NUTS 1 regions of the UK, refer to Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales as "regions".[10][11] With regard to Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales particularly, the descriptive name one uses "can be controversial, with the choice often revealing one's political preferences". What about the Isle of Man? It's not part of the UK, but is a self-governing possession of the British Crown.