NATION

NATION

1. A historically established part of humanity, united by a stable community of language, territory, economic life and culture. - A nation is not just a historical category, but a historical category of a certain era, the era of rising capitalism. “The process of eliminating feudalism and developing capitalism is at the same time the process of forming people into nations.” Stalin . “A nation is a historically established stable community of language, territory, economic life and mental makeup, manifested in a community of culture.” Stalin . “...A nation, like any historical phenomenon, is subject to the law of change, has its own history, beginning and end.” Stalin . “We are full of a sense of national pride, because the Great Russian nation also created a revolutionary class, also proved that it is capable of giving humanity great examples of the struggle for freedom and for socialism...” Lenin .

Ushakov's Explanatory Dictionary.

1935-1940.

Synonyms See what "NATION" is in other dictionaries: nation

- and, f. nation f. , floor. nacya, lat. nation tribe, people. Initially in the speech of Polish and French bilinguals (dipl. circles). Exchange 132. 1. Historically established stable community of people, characterized by a common language, territory,... ... Historical Dictionary of Gallicisms of the Russian Language

- (from lat. nation tribe, people), historical. community of people that develops during the formation of the community of their territory, economic. connections, lit. language, some features of culture and character. In the bourgeoisie there is no sociology and historiography... Philosophical Encyclopedia- (lat.). A people, in general, people who speak the same language, connected by a common origin and historical traditions, as well as tribal unity. Dictionary foreign words

, included in the Russian language. Chudinov A.N., 1910. NATION [lat. nation tribe... Dictionary of foreign words of the Russian language

- (from Latin natio tribe, people) a stable community of people living in the same territory, historically formed in the process of development, having a common culture, language, and identity. Characterized by economic community and unified, diverse... ... Political science. Dictionary.

Nation- Nation ♦ Nation A people considered from a political rather than a biological or cultural point of view (a nation is not a race or an ethnic group); a collection of individuals rather than an institution (a nation is not necessarily the same as a state). Renan... ... Sponville's Philosophical Dictionary

People, nationality, tribe; ethnicity, language Dictionary of Russian synonyms. nation nationality, people, tribe; language (obsolete) Dictionary of synonyms of the Russian language. Practical guide. M.: Russian language. Z. E. Alexandrova. 2011… Synonym dictionary

Nation- Nation: a) co-citizenship, a consolidated set of citizens of one state, which, while maintaining ethnic, religious and racial diversity, has a common language, a common culture with its inherent independent system of values,... ... Official terminology

Synonyms- NATION, people, nationality, obsolete. tribe, obsolete language … Dictionary-thesaurus of synonyms of Russian speech

- (lat. natio tribe, people) 1) in the theory of law, a historical community of people that develops in the process of forming a community of their territory, economic ties, language, some features of culture and character that constitute its characteristics. IN… … Legal dictionary

Books

• Nation and democracy. Prospects for managing cultural diversity, Pain Emil Abramovich, Fedyunin Sergey. Throughout the 20th and early 21st centuries. the idea of ​​a nation was being tested. The question has been repeatedly raised: is a nation needed today? Many intellectuals proclaimed an offensive...

from lat. natio - people) is a stable socio-ethnic community of people, formed historically on the foundation of common anthropological characteristics and a common ethnic destiny, common language, mental traits and cultural characteristics, most often connected by a common territory and economic life. Nationalism is an ideology that puts its nation (nationality) and its problems at the center of attention, giving priority to the national over the social.

One of characteristic features Stalin's Marxism-Leninism - belittling the role of the national in public life, subordination of the national as secondary to the general social or international. Vulgar political science, trying to overcome Stalinism and give the national its due place, generally abandoned any subordination of the national and the social.

The starting point for a correct understanding of the essence of the national and its role in public life is the recognition that man is a biosocial being. This means that human nature cannot be reduced to a “set of social relations,” as vulgar Marxism and Stalinism did, which ignored the role of the biological aspects of human essence (anthropological, ethnic, age-gender, emotional-volitional, mental and other characteristics), nor to the “complex of biological qualities”, which is characteristic of social Darwinism, racism and other teachings that underestimate the social side of human essence (general civilizational, socio-productive, socio-political and other qualities).

However, the recognition of man as a biosocial being, which focuses on taking into account both the biological and social aspects of human essence, does not mean at all that at different stages of anthropogenesis, at various historical turning points and for any ethnic communities, these aspects of human essence have always appeared and appear in static rather than dynamic relationships and interactions, that one can at least to some extent ignore the exceptional complexity, mobility and still poor knowledge of the processes taking place here (for example, the influence of the characteristics of the development of an ethnic group, its age on the social behavior of nations, on explosions of interethnic, racial and interethnic conflicts, etc. .d.).

Nations and national relations, which have developed in modern times, still do not have a theory adequate to their importance. Despite all the claims, Marxism has not solved this problem. Bulging social essence man to the detriment of his biological side, characteristic of both Marx and Lenin, led not only to a constant emphasis on internationalism to the detriment of the national, but also to constant criticism of any defense of the national, to the identification of such defense with nationalism alien to progress. In fact, the ideology of nationalism, understood as the ideology of protecting the rights and freedoms of citizens of their nation, as the protection of language, national culture, customs and habits (traditions), in itself does not contain anything reactionary. It’s another matter if nationalism turns into chauvinism, into the division of all nations into higher and lower, into the identification of one’s nation with a community that is destined for a special mission, which justifies disrespect for other nations and peoples, aggressiveness and other unjust actions.

Having identified nationalism with chauvinism, some Marxists often contrasted their democratic slogans, overshadowed by the banner of internationalism, with the completely natural defense of national interests. Stalinism took this one-sidedness to extremes; any defense of one’s nation, national language and culture was condemned; it was believed that the nation itself already belonged to the past, that a worldwide process of merging nations was already underway. The Soviet Union, conceived and proclaimed as a federal union of sovereign peoples and nations, was gradually rebuilt into a despotic centralized unitary state with many of the features of an empire with countless national inequalities and injustices. This approach, passed off as Marxist-Leninist, was repeated in all multinational countries of “real socialism”. Under the pressure of repression and ideological demagogy, which hid the real state of affairs, national contradictions and grievances accumulated and multiplied.

The national question, proclaimed in the “socialist world” as a subordinate part of the social class question and declared in all multinational countries almost resolved once and for all, immediately revealed its unresolved nature and extreme urgency as soon as democratization and democratization began with the beginning of perestroika in the USSR (1985). Freedom of the press has arrived.

Despite all the peculiarities of interethnic relations in the USSR, the SFRY, Czechoslovakia and other European countries, what was common to all was the explosion of nationalism and the complete inability of both the party-state bureaucracy and the democrats who replaced it to find a reasonable theoretical and practical solution to the national question: the destruction of previous relations began , structures and multinational states. The actual undemocraticism of the previous and new authorities excluded the possibility of a real solution to the national question. The Soviet Union was the first to consciously restructure previous relations and took the path of preparing a new Union Treaty, the signing of which was disrupted by the August 1991 coup, and then by the abolition of the USSR as a result of the second, December coup (Belovezhskaya agreement). The sovereignty of the republics that overwhelmed the disintegrating USSR began to threaten the integrity Russian Federation, Ukraine, Georgia. Where is the way out?

At present, there is reason to assert that the social and the national are in such a complex interaction that this complexity does not allow either the primacy of the social (the expression of which was the erroneous formula of “limited sovereignty” or “delegation of the rights of the republics to the center”), nor the primacy of the national over the social ( the expression of which was the erroneous formula “take as much sovereignty as you can stomach”). Life has revealed an obvious incompatibility between the principle of sovereignty and the principle of inviolability of borders, growth of productive forces, internationalization and integration of economies with sovereignization, etc.

Taking into account the current situation, the solution seems to be the following: wherever there are developed nations and nationalities, the absolute and inalienable sovereignty of each nation or nationality must be proclaimed and ensured. If such a nation is part of a broader, multinational association (federation, confederation, commonwealth, union), permanent joint bodies should be established in this broader association, which are not delegated any rights and powers of nations (republics), and where their Representatives jointly resolve issues of individual and common interest to them. Moreover, every nation has the inalienable right to take or not to take part in a particular act, agreement, or action. Moreover, the republic representing the nation, as an independent state, will participate in solving common problems either in federal or confederal forms, or as an associated member. At the same time, no decisions of joint state (political) bodies, as well as national republican ones, affecting the interests of a given nation (people), can take place without the legally provided consent of the nation (people) and their authorized representatives.

Throughout human history, any organized human society has been considered a nation. A nation meant a people with its own history, culture and language, which did not always even have an official government or a clearly defined place of residence. Many nations were essentially tribes, such as the Cherokees of Oklahoma. In the 17th century the definition of a nation has changed because political values ​​shifted towards the concept of "nation-state". With the advent of the modern concept of nationalism, which refers to a strong sense of cultural, historical and territorial unity, people became aware of their right to reside in their own nation-states. Today, the concept of a nation or nation-state is defined as a minimum number of people with a clear sense of cultural unity who live in an area with officially recognized boundaries and have an independent national government.

The rapid development of the modern concept of nation has caused major changes in the world over the past centuries. Loyalty to monarchs, the church, or one's overlords gave way to devotion to the cause of the nation. In the twentieth century, world political structure continued to change radically, which was caused by the development modern means communications and movement, as a result of which nationalism became an even more prominent political force. Vast empires like Austria-Hungary or British Empire, split as the conquered peoples began to fight for the rights of their nations to self-determination. This caused the emergence of many new states, especially in America, Asia and Africa. There are now 160 separate nations in the world, and the process of their formation has not yet ended, although this is not happening so quickly.

What is a nation? Various nations of the world community exemplify different stages of social, economic and cultural development. Some of them, for example, the Americans and the Japanese, are highly technologically developed countries with a high standard of living. Others, like India and Zaire, are trying to overcome their poverty. But despite all their differences, all nations have a number of common characteristic features, which make them nation-states.

Each nation occupies and controls an independent geographical territory with recognition (if not approval) of the world community. For example, the whole world recognizes that Wales is part of Great Britain, and Ukraine is part of the Soviet Union, although both Wales and Ukraine have their own cultural traditions and speak national languages. Sometimes one nation may refuse to recognize the diplomatic status of another nation for political or ideological reasons. For nearly 25 years, the United States refused to recognize the People's Republic of China as the legitimate political regime within China. But the PRC was recognized as an independent state by the majority of nations in the world community.

Territorial claims of nations sometimes lead to border disputes because both states believe they have the right to control the territory. Disagreements over the territory of Texas led to war between Mexico and the United States in 1846; and an armed conflict arose between India and Pakistan over the territory of Kashmir and Bangladesh. Such conflicts are usually not resolved until war breaks out and the victorious nation has the right to have its claims recognized as legitimate.

The ability of people to unite; nationalism. Nationalism is the main pillar of the existence of a nation. In times of political change and unrest, a sense of national unity acts as a unifying force that allows the people to feel like a nation, which makes it easier for the government to deal with the situation. Nationalism helps justify the actions of government authorities, because people with a sense of national unity are unlikely to consider their government an alien political superstructure. Nationalism thus helps justify the use of force by authorities against their own people or against other states.

An important aspect of nationalism is the emotional commitment of people to a geographic region. Every nation has its own feelings towards its homeland. The English colonialists also tried to capture a piece of their homeland in America, so they gave their settlements such names as Georgia, Virginia and New York. Now Russians talk about “Mother Russia,” and the Japanese consider Mount Fuji a symbol of their nation.

But a sense of national unity cannot be built on attachment to a geographical territory alone. Common historical and cultural roots are also necessary for its emergence. The consciousness of a common past, a common history greatly unites people, just as it unites the citizens of the Republic of Ireland who are proud of the centuries-old struggle of their state with England. In the same way, the consciousness of the general cultural heritage, such as religion, national literature, artistic or musical traditions, can help create a sense of national unity. The Roman Catholic Church and monuments of architecture and art of the Renaissance in Italy, the Russian literary heritage of such writers as Leo Tolstoy - all this greatly contributed to the formation of a sense of national unity between Italians and Russians. The lack of common traditions is one of the sources of instability in the political regimes of many African and Asian states. These countries had to rely on propaganda through the media, on "indoctrination" in schools, on education through the example of new national heroes, most often military ones, in order to develop in people a sense of national unity, which in fact could not fill the historical and cultural vacuum .

Like historical and cultural community, linguistic community is also an important part of nationalism. It is through language that historical, cultural and social traditions are transmitted from generation to generation; in addition, language is the main characteristic by which they differ ethnic groups. In some countries, such as India and Switzerland, two languages ​​are used. But in principle, the existence and functioning of several languages ​​in a country only leads to a split in society, while the national language acts as its unifying force. The division of Canada into an English-speaking population and a French-speaking population is perhaps one of the most difficult moments in the history of the nation. In some Asian and African states, consisting of many tribes, English or French became widespread along with the national language, since these states were previously English or French colonies.

What keeps a state from disintegrating, in which there seem to be no common traditions and whose peoples constitute ethnically diverse groups with their own religion, history and traditions? The United States lacks many of the features of a nation state: the country does not have a single national religion, and the US culture is a “synthesis” of the cultural traditions of other countries. Dennis Brogan, an English political commentator, noted that American nationalism rests primarily on certain symbolic concepts: the ideals of the nation, expressed in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, act as a unifying force. In fact, Mormon religious doctrine holds that the Constitution was divinely inspired and written by the hand of God.

Independence and legitimacy. An important component of nationalism is historical and cultural community, but another, no less important, is the desire of nations for independence. The independence of a nation means governing the country without outside interference. As already mentioned..., the stronghold of national independence is the rule of law, which can be defined as the ability of the government to maintain the people's trust in itself. How do nations develop? What comes first - states or nations? A nation is a community of people who have self-awareness, a sense of unity, similar positions and ideals, and most often (but not always) speak the same language. A state is a government structure, most often independent and with sufficient power to enforce its orders (it should be noted that here the word “state” is used in its literal meaning; in this sense, the 50 US states are not states). Many would argue that nations came into being long before the state. States, after all, are rather artificial entities: they are born, die and undergo changes. Naturally, it is nations that underlie states, and not vice versa; people with their common national feelings are more important than government structures.

Historical research, however, refutes this common sense view. In almost all cases, states - governmental structures - emerged first and only then nations formed around them.

Crowds of rioters, shouting anti-government slogans, spill through the streets of the capital of a third world country. They are tired of constant hunger, while the president's friends and relatives live in luxury. Even privileged business circles are aware of how corrupt the government is and are calling for the president's resignation. The President, fearing for his life and well-being, gives the army the order to shoot the rebels. Instead, the army sides with the rebels, and the president flees with suitcases filled with money, jewelry, and works of art. And although he proclaimed himself the father and savior of his country, it turned out that few people supported him.

On another continent, members of a radical underground group meet in a small apartment to plan a terrorist attack. They are irritated and outraged by what they perceive as a violation of their national rights. Every person has a homeland, why can't they have one? The government they hate refuses to recognize them; Moreover, it defines them as enemies of the state, their peaceful political protest was met with police batons and arrests, so the terrorists decide to achieve their goal by more effective means. They stuff a car with explosives and park it near a government building; The clock mechanism triggers an explosive device, killing passers-by. Terrorists believe that they have done an important job and are proud of their work.

At this time, the American president is trying to carefully renege on his promises on a number of political issues. His simple slogan won the elections, propelling him far ahead of his rivals on one of the events of the current moment. However, once he assumed the presidency, he realized how difficult it would be to keep his promises on this issue and how difficult it would be to move the issue through Congress, the bureaucracy, and through layers of different interests. The President is trying to weaken his policies, expresses a desire for compromise and tries to appear confident in this political issue. Critics say he is becoming weak and indecisive. Ironically, it was in these terms that the president spoke about his predecessor, whom he defeated in the election. Being president, he silently reflects, is much more difficult than he imagined.

Great definition

Incomplete definition ↓

Which can be expressed not only in political manifestos, but also in literary works, scientific works etc. According to constructivists, nationalism does not awaken the nation, which until then remains a thing-in-itself, but creates a new nation where there was none. In this case, the geographical boundaries of the national project are the actual political borders of the state, and the ethnic differences of the population participating in the construction of such a nation do not matter at all.

One of the main theorists of constructivism, Benedict Anderson, defines nations as “imagined communities”: “I propose following definition nation: it is an imagined political community, and it is imagined as something inevitably limited, but at the same time sovereign." What is meant, of course, is not that nations are some kind of fiction in general, but that only rationally thinking individuals really exist, and the nation exists only in their heads, “in the imagination,” due to the fact that this is how they identify themselves , and not in any other way.

Constructivists deny continuity between the ethnic groups of pre-industrial society and modern nations; they emphasize that nations are products of industrialization, the spread of universal standardized education, the development of science and technology (in particular, printing, mass communications and information) and that in the pre-industrial era, ethnic groups and ethnic identity did not play such an important role, since traditional society offered many other forms of identity (class, religion, etc.).

Ethnicity

Ethnonation (the theory of sociobiological primordialism of a nation) understands a nation as the transition of an ethnos to a special national stage of development, that is, as a biological phenomenon. The emergence of this type of nationalism is associated with the formation of the mystical concept of the “folk spirit” (Volksgeist) within the framework of German “populist” (volkisch) and racist, ariososophical nationalism of the 18th-19th centuries (in particular, in the works of representatives of German romanticism). The early German nationalist romantics believed that there was a certain “folk spirit” - an irrational, supernatural principle that embodied in various peoples and determined their originality and difference from each other, and which found expression in “blood” and in race. From this point of view, the “national spirit” is transmitted with “blood”, that is, by inheritance, thus, the nation is understood as a community descended from common ancestors, connected by consanguineous ties.

Since the 1950s of the twentieth century, the theory of ethnonation has rapidly begun to lose ground in Western science. The reason for this was, first of all, a fact pointed out by one of the main opponents of primordialism, Benedict Anderson: “Theorists of nationalism have often been perplexed, if not irritated, by the following three paradoxes: The objective modernity of nations in the eyes of the historian, on the one hand, and their subjective antiquity in the eyes of a nationalist, on the other..." The point is that historical research has shown that nations were formed in Western Europe not so long ago - in the early modern era, and in other regions even later - in Eastern Europe in the 19th century, in Asia and Africa - in the 20th century, so it is very problematic to elevate them to any one ethnic group, of which this nation is supposedly a higher stage of development. For example, the French nation was formed in the era of the Enlightenment and the Great French Revolution as a result of the union of culturally diverse peoples - Gascons, Burgundians, Bretons, etc. Many of them continued to exist in the 19th and 20th centuries, never fully “Frenchizing” . In this regard, an expression like: “French culture of the 12th century” looks dubious. Moreover, after the breakup colonial system In the 1950s and 1960s, new nations rapidly began to form in Asia and Africa, including a wide variety of ethnic groups. And this is despite the fact that just a few decades ago the peoples of Africa, who later became part of certain nations, did not even have an idea of ​​such a community as a nation and nationality; they, along with the ideas of a nation state and the ideology of nationalism, were brought to them by the European colonialists.

Nation and nationality

It is necessary to distinguish between such interrelated, but not identical concepts as “nation” and “nationality”. The concept of “nationality” in Russia and other countries of the post-Soviet space, expressing an ethnic community, is only one of the factors of a nation and nationality. Therefore, it is narrower than the concept of “nation”. This does not apply to other countries where nationality is belonging to a certain nation based on citizenship. The source of ethnic connection between people is the commonality of cultural characteristics and natural conditions being, leading to the differentiation of a given primary group from another. Racism theorists believed that genetic characteristics are the basis of an ethnic group, but this is refuted empirically (for example, Abkhazian blacks). A nation is a more complex and later formation. If ethnic groups existed throughout world history, then nations are formed only in the period of New and even Contemporary times.

A nation can be of two types: multi-ethnic (multi-ethnic) or mono-ethnic. Ethnically homogeneous nations are extremely rare and are found mainly in remote corners of the world (for example, Iceland). Usually a nation is built on the basis of a large number of ethnic groups, which were brought together by historical fate. For example, the Swiss, French, British, Russian, and Vietnamese nations are multiethnic, while the Americans do not have any distinct ethnic face at all. Latin American nations are racially heterogeneous - made up of whites, Africans, Creoles and Amerindians.

In some cases, the concept “people” is synonymous with nation; in the constitutional law of English- and Romance-speaking countries - a term usually meaning “state”, “society”, “the totality of all citizens”.

In the USSR, a nation was more often understood as any ethnic group within the state, and for a multi-ethnic community the term “multinational people” was used, which included, for example, Soviet, Indian, American, Yugoslav and others. In English-language terminology (and in most of the current Russian terminology), the nation is associated with the state, for example, they write about the Indians as a “multi-ethnic nation”. Some researchers believe that the definition of ethnic groups as nations in the USSR was associated with the political technological need to use the right of nations to self-determination to fight the multi-ethnic countries of the capitalist world.

Nation and ethnicity in academic science

The scientific-functional approach to the difference between a nation and an ethnic group is that ethnic groups are studied by ethnology; for research in the field of ethnology, the titles of candidates and doctors of historical, sociological sciences or cultural studies are given (depending on the topic of research). The theory of political doctrines studies the nation and nationalism. There is no “nationology”; it is precisely a political doctrine. For research in this direction they are awarded the title of candidate and doctor of political science. This title is not given for ethnic research. Ethnology is not included in the training program for political scientists, and the nation is not included in ethnological disciplines.

Academic science denies such a concept as “ethnonation”, and recognizes as a nation only a political association of citizens on the basis of common citizenship.

Nation and language

National culture

A nation is primarily a political phenomenon, and only then ethnic and social. Therefore, the main task of a nation is to reproduce the cultural identity common to all citizens of the country in political interests. For this purpose, there are ministries of culture, whose task is to determine the format of national culture that is common to everyone.

Wikimedia Foundation.

2010.

Olga Nagornyuk

Brief and accessible: what is a nation

The term “nation” is often used as a synonym for the words “people”, “ethnic group”, “nationality”. Is it correct? Is it possible to put an equal sign between all the listed words? To answer this question, you must first understand what a nation is.

Definition of the term If we asked a resident Ancient Rome

to define what a nation is, he would say: it is a tribe or people. After all, this is precisely the meaning of the Latin word “natio”, which sounds in the Russian version as “nation”. It should be noted that since ancient times the meaning attached to the concept of “nation” has undergone changes, and today it is not identical to the meanings of the words “people” and “ethnic group”.

Historians believe that nations began to emerge only in modern times, with the emergence of capitalism. Scientists call a nation a historically established community of people who have their own statehood and are united by living in the same territory, a common language, culture and national identity. A nation without sovereign statehood is a people, or ethnic group. Let us explain using the example of the USA. The American nation is one of the youngest. It has all the above characteristics: its representatives live on the territory of a country that is a sovereign state, speak English language

and recognize themselves as Americans. However, within the nation there is a separate community - the Indians, who are deprived of statehood, and therefore cannot be called a nation, but only an ethnic group or people.

Nation: distinctive features

1. There are several criteria by which individuals are united into a nation. However, some of these factors may be absent, but the nation does not cease to be a nation. Common territory of residence and the presence of state sovereignty. But what about the Soviet Union, you ask? It turns out there was a Soviet nation? No, it wasn’t, because in the case of the USSR, all the other components that turn a people into a nation were absent: the inhabitants of a country that occupied a sixth of the landmass spoke different languages , belonged to and each identified themselves with their own nation: Lithuanian, Kazakh, Armenian, Ukrainian, etc.
2. Unity of language. It is generally accepted that representatives of one nation should speak a common language. But there are exceptions to this rule. For example, the Swiss, who speak four languages, but at the same time, without a doubt, remain a nation.
3. United culture, history, religion and way of life. Russia with its diversity of national cultures, different ways of life (compare the customs of the Evenks and Russians) and different paths does not fit into this template. historical development(for example, when in the west Russian Empire capitalism was already developing, feudalism was just emerging in the east).
4. National identity. Every representative of a nation must recognize himself as part of it. Let's take the Americans, for example. In fact, they are the result of a mixture of many peoples: the British, the French, the Mexicans, the Indians, the Eskimos and the inhabitants of Africa. However, they were able to create a strong national idea and rally the nation around it. And here Soviet Union It was not possible to do this; as a result, this country disappeared from the world map.

Historians call the oldest nations Latin American, and the youngest include Vietnamese and Cambodian.

Nation, ethnic group, people, nationality

Having found out what a nation is, let's determine its differences from other similar concepts. We have already written above: a nation without statehood becomes a people, or an ethnic group. The lack of a unified national identity leads to the same result. Residents former USSR did not identify themselves with the concept of “Soviet people,” so the attempt to artificially create a nation failed.

Now about what nationality is. In fact, this is the name given to a person's ethnic origin. By birth, we all have some kind of nationality, determined by the ethnicity of our parents: Jews, Ukrainians, Russians, Tajiks. By moving to another country, adopting its cultural and spiritual values, assimilating with the local population, beginning to think and act like the indigenous people, we become part of another nation, although formally we remain representatives of the nationality inherited from our ancestors.

We tried to briefly and clearly explain what a nation is. In fact, it doesn’t matter what nation you belong to, what country you live in and what language you speak. The main thing is to always and everywhere remain human.

Take it for yourself and tell your friends!

Read also on our website:

show more

2.1 History of origin and formation of the nation

Nation (from Latin natio - tribe, people) is a socio-economic, cultural, political and spiritual community of the industrial era.

The emergence of nations is historically associated with the development of production relations, overcoming national isolation and fragmentation, with the education common system economy, in particular the common market, the creation and dissemination of a common literary language, common elements of culture, etc. But the formation of nations is not a universal stage in the development of all peoples of the world. Many small peoples (tribes, linguistic and territorial groups) often merge with large nations.

The processes of nation formation are objectively related to the formation of states. Therefore, K. Kautsky considered the classical form of the state nation state. However, the fate of not every nation is connected with statehood; rather, it is an ideal coincidence. According to the concept of K. Kautsky, the most important factors in the consolidation of people into a nation were commodity production and trade. Most modern nations were born in the process of the formation of bourgeois relations (from the 9th to 15th centuries), but they were formed and developed before capitalism. In countries where development was hampered by colonialism for centuries, this process continues to this day.

The formation of a nation is a complex and lengthy process, in which socio-economic factors play a decisive role. At the same time, the identification of a nation is possible on the basis of its own ethnic properties. The economic and political consolidation of the nation is facilitated by the formation of a single national language and national culture.

On this basis, features of the national character are formed, national self-awareness arises, which presupposes a commitment to national language, territory, culture, a sense of national pride, as well as certain ethnic stereotypes that accumulate the collective experience of attitudes towards one’s nation and other ethnic groups.

The national question in Russia

The concepts used when considering the national question are too ambiguous to be used without additional explanation. The key concept is the nation. There are at least three options for understanding it...

The national question in Russia

In demography, a special place is occupied by the issues of studying the level of social and cultural development of nations, their consolidation, assimilation, integration, interethnic marriages, bilingualism, development of national identity...

Typology of social communities according to the degree of stability and according to size and other criteria

“A clear understanding of observing your duty to people is your true freedom. The more humanely and consciously you observe your duty to people, the more you draw from the inexhaustible source of true human happiness - freedom."

Characteristics of ethnic processes. The problem of the relationship between ethnicity and nation

Often an equal sign is placed between the concept of “nation” and the concepts of “people” and “ethnic group”. In fact, the French are a people, an ethnic group, and they are also a nation. This naturally suggests the conclusion: an ethnic community (people) and a nation are one and the same thing...

Ethnic communities. Nations and national relations. Types and forms of state

A nation is the highest form of ethnic community of people, the most developed, historically stable, united by economic, territorial-state, cultural, psychological and religious characteristics. Some scientists believe...

Ethnocultural conditions as mesofactors of socialization

Ethnicity (or nation) is a historically established, stable collection of people with a common mentality, national identity and character, stable cultural characteristics...