Research Paper Sample: Similarities and Differences Between Nations and States

The study of politics shows some conceptual similarities between nations and states, but there are also significant differences that are critical in assessing their structure and impact. The concept of a state can be understood as a political association that establishes sovereign jurisdiction within defined territories through permanent institutions. The concept of a nation can be defined as a community of people who share a common history, culture, language, and religion, and usually occupy the same geographical area. The purpose of this essay is to compare and contrast these concepts with consideration of territories, sovereignty, governance and political theories. This will enable us to determine whether these concepts can be considered distinct or similar.

One of the key features in defining a state, as outlined in the Montevideo Convention of the Rights and Duties of the State (1933) is the possession of a defined territory over which it has jurisdiction. This claim is corroborated by sociologist Max Weber who states that states are given legitimacy through their control on the "use of physical force within a given territory". Physical force is controlled by states due to the establishment of permanent institutions like police and military that are responsible for enforcing the laws made by the government on behalf of the state. States can set up these permanent institutions because of their control over the territory in which they enforce.  Similarly, a nation may be seen as having territory as they often occupy a distinct geographical area and are seen as having possession of that area as stated by historians Geoff Eley and Ronald G. Suny (1996, p.10) who say "A nation - like a state - implies a claim on a particular piece of real estate" However, the territory defined by nations may not be considered to be distinct as in the definition of a state, as national groups are often spread amongst several states, suggesting that nations do not have tidy geographical boundaries. This differs from states whose borders are less natural, and have been decided and changed by governing bodies. These changes or decisions regarding the split of the jurisdiction in the form of states has been the cause of civil unrest in several situations such as in the partition of India and the break-up of the USSR. The evidence, therefore, suggests that while Nations and States can be seen as similar in their jurisdiction of a geographical area, the extent to which that area is defined shows the difference between these concepts.

Sovereignty is another feature of states that is integral to their definition. Jean Bodin, a 16th-century French philosopher, defined sovereignty as "the power to make laws without restriction or division." Sovereignty is crucial to states as it gives them both the power of legislation and international recognition, which allows international relations between them, another key feature of the Montevideo Convention. In support of this claim, politician William Blackstone states that "there must be in every state a supreme, irresistible, absolute and uncontrolled authority, in which the right of sovereignty resides." Nations are also characterized by their sovereignty, as the core belief of nationalism is the right to self-determination. Self-determination is the process by which a country determines its statehood and forms its government. The political motivation for national sovereignty is similar to that of state sovereignty, however, its authority stems from the identity of the citizen and serves to create a distinct association that accepts authority as part of protecting or enhancing national identity. Philosopher Ernest Gellner asserts this view stating that "national identity is politically vital because it answers the question beyond the reach of democracy: who are the people to govern themselves" According to this quote, a political community gains legitimacy and sovereignty through compliance with laws by those they govern. In other words, if the national identity of the people allows them to govern themselves, then the people will likely accept that sovereignty as a social contract. Therefore nations and states share a similar need for sovereignty, even though their forms of sovereignty vary.

Citizenship is another key feature of states, as states are responsible for their political territories, and therefore must govern over people. Hauge and Harrop define a citizen as a "full member of state, entitled to the rights and subject to the duties associated with that status." This suggests that in states citizenship is not inherent and may only refer to those born within the territory of which they govern. Citizenship is important to states not only as they are to reflect the interest of citizens of the state but also that those who have citizenship of the territory have the ability to vote and form governments which is an agent of the state. As a permanent population is important to the definition of a state under the Montevideo Convention, the authority over citizens and non-citizens of the territory is a core feature of states. Citizenship is also important to Nations, as the cultural definition of a nation, as presented by political author Andrew Heywood, defines it as a "group of people bound together by a common language, religion, history and traditions." Therefore those who fit the cultural criteria can be seen as citizens of the nation, however, this criteria is hard to define as most nations are not entirely homogenous and therefore it can be difficult to ascertain specific cultural criteria which people have to meet. It can be argued that citizenship is a more important component in states, whereby the criteria to become a citizen is better defined than in nations.

When evaluating the differences and similarities between nations and states, it is also important to consider their relationship to politics and how influential they are in both foreign and domestic policy-making and relations. It is especially important to consider in states since states are fundamentally political associations and control interactions and organizations, including but not exclusive to governments, which enable a society to reach and enforce decisions collectively. States experience of politics is tied into its relationship with permanent institutions such as the police system, which in the words of Heywood, "ensure that its laws are obeyed and that transgressors are punished." Without the ability to enforce policies made by the government, the state will lose its legitimacy. Nation's are political in that they believe that the national government is the truest form of governance, this belief classifies it as a political doctrine. Belief in a national identity also has political ramifications as it is often used to encourage extreme political participation, as suggested by a quote from Longman saying that "National identity provides a rationalisation for the participation in the war, encouraging people to die for the sake of strangers." This is due to the patriotism and belief in a natural political community which is core to nationalism. Therefore, nations and states share political components which can be used to assist in the definition of them, with nations having a patriotic political system and states following enforced policies made by the institutions of the state.

Finally, it is important to consider that there are many theories and interpretations surrounding both state and nation which can help to analyse the factors as seen by different political theorists. Some theories on state include the pluralist, Marxist, new right and radical feminist theories. The Pluralist theory believes the primary function of the state is balancing the interests of those it governs as a neutral organisation. The Marxist theory believes that the states primary function is maintaining the class system and ameliorating class conflict. The New Right theory believes that the primary function of the state is an expansion and to further its own goals. The Radical Feminist theory believes that the primary function of the state is to support male power and protect the patriarchal system. Some theories on nation include liberal nationalism, conservative nationalism and anticolonial nationalism. Liberal nationalism is defined by a belief in the autonomy of a nation and the right to self-determination. It also believes that nationalism is a mechanism for uniting nations and ensuring that their rights are protected. Conservative nationalism is defined by a belief in social cohesion and national patriotism and believes that it is a mechanism to safeguard cultural traditions and old values. Anticolonial nationalism is defined by a belief in political independence and aims to end subordination to other nations. Examining the theories associated with both nation and state show that there are many differing opinions on the function of state however the theories on nations tend to adhere to one of the core functions under the previous definition showing how different these concepts are viewed.

This essay aimed to evaluate the similarities and differences between nations and states with consideration of territories, governance, sovereignty and political theories. The results of this study show that nations and states feature some conceptual similarities such as a need for sovereignty, a permanent population and a form of legitimacy. However, they can be seen as distinctive concepts through differences in their formation, how they gain legitimacy and through who has citizenship.