Every Monday, I send out an email with new videos. This way, I can reach people even if the UA-cam algorithm isn't working for my videos. If that's for you, click here and put in your email address - eepurl.com/hSeKpj
The British Dominions during the late 19th and early 20th century are an example of states that became sovereign in all but name. They gained control over their own military forces, found work-arounds for diplomatic representation, had control over immigration, maintained tariffs against the rest of the Empire, signed peace treaties at the end of WW I and were members of the League of Nations. All of this, even though they weren't technically independent of the United Kingdom until the Statute of Westminster was passed in 1931.
4:56 One correction, Singapore did not secede, it was expelled. Also 6:56 Japan does not record ethnicity, the 98% figure denotes citizenship, not the ethnicity of the population. Still, it could well be argued Japan is indeed a nation-state.
I think in the USA we use the word “Country” instead of the word “State” as we see the word “State” as a division or part of something bigger. We also tend to use the words “Country” and “Nation” interchangeably. You say that North & South Korea are nation-states which you pluralized it meaning that they are separate nation-states. I see a nation-state as a country where there is one nationality. Both North and South Korea claim sovereignty over the whole peninsula.
Claiming sovereignty doesn’t equate to actual sovereignty There’s de facto sovereignty and de jure sovereignty. Like the PRC and ROC have de Jure claims of sovereignty towards each other, but They only have De facto control over their real territory North and South Korea are two different nation states, because they have different laws and systems, despite once being one nation with one people. Korea WAS a sovereign nation that stretched the whole peninsula until 1948, THEN they became 2 sovereign Korean states. I think the best way to put it is: if they have irredentist views, have different legal codes, global recognition as a country with generally agreed borders, and are not in a static or active conflict that contests the other polity’s existence and power, then you have a sovereign state. There’s also different sovereignty within the same cultural or ethnic group. North and South Korea are sovereign states within a larger geographical region, with the same ethnicity and historical background. The only difference is the type of government and economic system, and the social structure after the ceasefire
also sovereignty means people to hand down their political power to the monopoly of violence to the state-government. And sovereign territory means to defend a territory by foreign forces or indigenous people who oppose the state as form of government in general.
So if some large and powerful multiethnic empires from the past with not so defined borders still existed today(ex: Roman Empire, Umayyad Caliphate, T'ang Empire,etc), would they be considered countries? We recognize that many empires and kingdoms definitely existed in the past that do not meet the current requirements of recognition.
Rome would probably be the only one to be close to anything resembling a nation. The strength of Rome (for a time) was its ability to integrate people that, within a generation, saw themselves as Roman. That right there (a single, recognized border that contains a singular recognized people) is basically the definition of a nation-state
It’s ironic that u say the states are not sovereign because in order to be admitted into the UNION a state has to have SOVEREIGNTY or else we do not have united STATES 🇺🇸 under the republic for which it stands
Rigged NO papers fresh printed never folded were counted live on the BBC. Large soldier types delivered them to the tellers desk by the holdall 8 reams at a time. Appropriate personnel paid off and the rest to thick to see what was occurring.
Hongkongers has become something of an identity that is somewhat distinct from mainlanders in a similar vein to the Taiwanese. They are not a sovereign state, but they could be considered a nation
Every Monday, I send out an email with new videos. This way, I can reach people even if the UA-cam algorithm isn't working for my videos. If that's for you, click here and put in your email address - eepurl.com/hSeKpj
Excellent video on explaining the different political terms for nations, or countries, or sovereign states,
This was VERY helpful, thank you so much!
No problem! I’m glad it was helpful!
This is saving the last section of my OCR Geography A-level. Thank you!
Thank you so much!
@2.26 Foreign aid😂😂
You should do a playlist with all of your videos to help people like me that are watching all of your videos.
Great info
Awesome!
The British Dominions during the late 19th and early 20th century are an example of states that became sovereign in all but name. They gained control over their own military forces, found work-arounds for diplomatic representation, had control over immigration, maintained tariffs against the rest of the Empire, signed peace treaties at the end of WW I and were members of the League of Nations. All of this, even though they weren't technically independent of the United Kingdom until the Statute of Westminster was passed in 1931.
Interesting video.
4:56 One correction, Singapore did not secede, it was expelled. Also 6:56 Japan does not record ethnicity, the 98% figure denotes citizenship, not the ethnicity of the population. Still, it could well be argued Japan is indeed a nation-state.
Brilliant.. my lord..👍️
I think in the USA we use the word “Country” instead of the word “State” as we see the word “State” as a division or part of something bigger. We also tend to use the words “Country” and “Nation” interchangeably. You say that North & South Korea are nation-states which you pluralized it meaning that they are separate nation-states. I see a nation-state as a country where there is one nationality. Both North and South Korea claim sovereignty over the whole peninsula.
Claiming sovereignty doesn’t equate to actual sovereignty
There’s de facto sovereignty and de jure sovereignty.
Like the PRC and ROC have de Jure claims of sovereignty towards each other, but They only have De facto control over their real territory
North and South Korea are two different nation states, because they have different laws and systems, despite once being one nation with one people.
Korea WAS a sovereign nation that stretched the whole peninsula until 1948, THEN they became 2 sovereign Korean states.
I think the best way to put it is: if they have irredentist views, have different legal codes, global recognition as a country with generally agreed borders, and are not in a static or active conflict that contests the other polity’s existence and power, then you have a sovereign state.
There’s also different sovereignty within the same cultural or ethnic group. North and South Korea are sovereign states within a larger geographical region, with the same ethnicity and historical background. The only difference is the type of government and economic system, and the social structure after the ceasefire
@@jtgd"Korea was a sovereign nation ... until 1948" What do you mean by that?
If you don't stand up for your rights or you don't fight for your rights you don't have any.
Great,
hi just letting u know u saved me this is so helpful,
legit dying im studying global history rn
No problem! I appreciate the sub! And good luck with your classes.
@@GeographyGeek thank u🥺
also sovereignty means people to hand down their political power to the monopoly of violence to the state-government. And sovereign territory means to defend a territory by foreign forces or indigenous people who oppose the state as form of government in general.
No
So if some large and powerful multiethnic empires from the past with not so defined borders still existed today(ex: Roman Empire, Umayyad Caliphate, T'ang Empire,etc), would they be considered countries? We recognize that many empires and kingdoms definitely existed in the past that do not meet the current requirements of recognition.
Rome would probably be the only one to be close to anything resembling a nation. The strength of Rome (for a time) was its ability to integrate people that, within a generation, saw themselves as Roman. That right there (a single, recognized border that contains a singular recognized people) is basically the definition of a nation-state
Wish you’d mention africa in terms of what is a state country etc
Actually Bangladesh is the biggest nation state with 160M people whom 98%+ are ethnically Bengalis.
It’s ironic that u say the states are not sovereign because in order to be admitted into the UNION a state has to have SOVEREIGNTY or else we do not have united STATES 🇺🇸 under the republic for which it stands
Pretty sure it was 45% voting to leave UK for the Scottish referendum
Rigged NO papers fresh printed never folded were counted live on the BBC. Large soldier types delivered them to the tellers desk by the holdall 8 reams at a time. Appropriate personnel paid off and the rest to thick to see what was occurring.
The explanations and meanings are academic and become less and less important and applicable as the days go by.
Foreign aid lol
Is hong kong a nation or state?hihi
It is a mostly autonomous city within China that had been a colony of Britain.
Hongkongers has become something of an identity that is somewhat distinct from mainlanders in a similar vein to the Taiwanese. They are not a sovereign state, but they could be considered a nation
This Is for USA I presume.
I hope you realize that USA stands for united state(s) of America. Plural not singular.
Yes, I made this for my 8th grade geography class. Uh…yes lol