4 ms·

You can always break some UK laws and find out whether you are ruled from London. Expensive experiment for sure, but I'm certain of the outcome. Likewise, the

You can always break some UK laws and find out whether you are ruled from London. Expensive experiment for sure, but I'm certain of the outcome. Likewise, the Catalans (a region in Spain) recently found out whether they belong to the nation state Spain. Their seditious "leaders" were thrown into prison by Spain.

ThrowawayR2 2mo ago
Your example demonstrates that the UK meets the definition of a state but not necessarily the definition a nation (shared culture/identity).
- nephihaha 2mo ago
  The UK is a state, but arguable as a nation from certain points of view. It is not a federal system as some think it is. In fact, even the relatively recent UK supreme court may very well be unconstitutional. France has been more heavy-handed with uniting its nation, but even it has issues. Spain is possibly looser than the UK, at least outside the sporting arena.
deleted 2mo ago
[deleted]
nephihaha 2mo ago
You are confusing two separate issues here. Apart from the fact Scotland has its own legal system within the UK, we are talking about whether it is a nation. In terms of people's identity, it is not really a full nation state. The Scots, and to a lesser extent the Welsh, have a complex relationship with Britishness. That's before we get to Northern Ireland which was arguably the most politically unstable region in western Europe within living memory. The UK is not a federal system like the USA, and so there is very little that counts as UK law as such. Even within Dublin, back when it was in the UK, the Easter Rebels of 1916 were mostly processed within Ireland itself. Portugal and Andorra have a better case for being nation states than Spain does. I definitely would not call Spain a nation state. Or China or Russia. Being able to throw people in a prison does not prove it is a nation state. The Catalans are a nation as are the Basques.
- vinay427 2mo ago
  > The UK is not a federal system like the USA, and so there is very little that counts as UK law as such. This seems quite far-fetched. Parliamentary sovereignty alone would be unthinkable in the US model, where US federal legislatures have fairly delimited powers that they cannot arbitrarily change. The Scottish government, for example, essentially exists at the whim of Westminster and (in this iteration) was only created a few decades ago.
  - nephihaha 2mo ago
    Scots law is actually a separate issue from the current Scottish Parliament, in fact it was used as one of the arguments for having one. I remember it being set up: I voted for it. The UK constitution, if it can be called such, is made up of numerous contradictory documents, but Scotland retaining its own legal system was one of those. It has some everyday features not found elsewhere in the UK like procurator fiscal, and until recently the "not proven" verdict. (I was at a murder case a couple of years ago where the panel (accused) was given a "not proven" verdict.)
consensus1 2mo ago
It's a simple formula: def do_i_belong_to(country): return this.army * this.commitment_level < country.army * country.commitment_level

ThrowawayR2 2mo ago

Your example demonstrates that the UK meets the definition of a state but not necessarily the definition a nation (shared culture/identity).

nephihaha 2mo ago
The UK is a state, but arguable as a nation from certain points of view. It is not a federal system as some think it is. In fact, even the relatively recent UK supreme court may very well be unconstitutional. France has been more heavy-handed with uniting its nation, but even it has issues. Spain is possibly looser than the UK, at least outside the sporting arena.

deleted 2mo ago

[deleted]

nephihaha 2mo ago

You are confusing two separate issues here. Apart from the fact Scotland has its own legal system within the UK, we are talking about whether it is a nation. In terms of people's identity, it is not really a full nation state. The Scots, and to a lesser extent the Welsh, have a complex relationship with Britishness. That's before we get to Northern Ireland which was arguably the most politically unstable region in western Europe within living memory. The UK is not a federal system like the USA, and so there is very little that counts as UK law as such. Even within Dublin, back when it was in the UK, the Easter Rebels of 1916 were mostly processed within Ireland itself. Portugal and Andorra have a better case for being nation states than Spain does. I definitely would not call Spain a nation state. Or China or Russia. Being able to throw people in a prison does not prove it is a nation state. The Catalans are a nation as are the Basques.

vinay427 2mo ago
> The UK is not a federal system like the USA, and so there is very little that counts as UK law as such. This seems quite far-fetched. Parliamentary sovereignty alone would be unthinkable in the US model, where US federal legislatures have fairly delimited powers that they cannot arbitrarily change. The Scottish government, for example, essentially exists at the whim of Westminster and (in this iteration) was only created a few decades ago.
- nephihaha 2mo ago
  Scots law is actually a separate issue from the current Scottish Parliament, in fact it was used as one of the arguments for having one. I remember it being set up: I voted for it. The UK constitution, if it can be called such, is made up of numerous contradictory documents, but Scotland retaining its own legal system was one of those. It has some everyday features not found elsewhere in the UK like procurator fiscal, and until recently the "not proven" verdict. (I was at a murder case a couple of years ago where the panel (accused) was given a "not proven" verdict.)

consensus1 2mo ago

It's a simple formula: def do_i_belong_to(country): return this.army * this.commitment_level < country.army * country.commitment_level