Can Conservatives Move Beyond the Identity Politics of Misogyny?

[Deleted]

This whole thing began over your pedestrian understanding of not just nation-states, So, yes, I know that they are not the same thing. Unlike you, I have actually devoted some actual time to studying their development. And, no, I'm not talking about a getting a degree from Wikipedia University.

Do you need more help?

A nation-state (hyphenated or not) in the most specific sense is a country where a distinct cultural or ethnic group (a "nation" or "people") inhabits a territory and have formed a state (often a sovereign state) that they predominantly govern. A nation, in the sense of a common ethnicity, may include a diaspora or refugees who live outside the nation-state; some nations of this sense do not have a state where that ethnicity predominates. In a more general sense, a nation-state is simply a large, politically sovereign country or administrative territory. A nation-state may be contrasted with:

A multinational state, where no one ethnic group dominates (may also be considered a multicultural state depending on the degree of cultural assimilation of various groups).
A city-state which is both smaller than a "nation" in the sense of "large sovereign country" and which may or may not be dominated by all or part of a single "nation" in the sense of a common ethnicity.[1][2][3]
An empire, which is composed of many countries (possibly non-sovereign states) and nations under a single monarch or ruling state government.
A confederation, a league of sovereign states, which might or might not include nation-states (such as the European Union).
A federated state which may or may not be a nation-state, and which is only partially self-governing within a larger federation (for example, the state boundaries of Bosnia and Herzegovina are drawn along ethnic lines, but those of the United States are not).
This article mainly discusses the more specific definition of a nation-state, as a typically sovereign country dominated by a particular ethnicity.

That's from Wikipedia but you know, you should still read it.

Here's a short play that maybe will help you understand things better.

All US states are sovereign
That's a matter basic definitions - it's like 1+1=2.

As a nation is any large group comradeship based on some assumed common characteristic, and the only actually existing common characteristic between Americans is citizenship,

Common citizenship does not constitute a nation - See, Syria, the EU, And i can go on.

then in the context of American identity, nationhood,

We are closing in here, you are approaching some form of understanding, but to relate to the former point, is the first generation hispanic (i.e born there) A US citizen?
Yes - Are they a US 'National' ? Or or is it more accurate to think of said person as part of a 'Hispanic' nation?
And here is where the discussion was, before you interrupted with inanity.

and state power,

And again, since you didn't get it last time, this has nothing to do with the state, and state power - The Kurds are a Nation, but they have no state.

that it's different in Europe and elsewhere is immaterial.

Given that we are speaking English not American and that the word Nation, comes from Latin, You are the abberant outlier that does not conform -

The United States has never been something akin to an ethnostate, at least in the formal sense, and deliberately rejected being something like that 150 years ago.

It's almost like i said that:

It's debatable if the US ever where a nation state, or if it were, multiple different nations over time.

Oh wait i did.
Also, have you heard of the immigration act of 1924? - Hint, it was explicitly racist, and with the explicit purpose of maintaining the homogeneity of the US and since basic things need to be explained to you, 1924 was 94 years ago.

Except whiteness doesn't have any real meaning, not then and not now. It's not like "left handed" or "blind," by which there is some objective criteria with which one can used to determine how and when and to who the label is applied. One day - and not very long ago - people decided whiteness needed to exist to justify and perpetuate existing social arrangements and just invented it.

This doesn't contradict what i said.

Category error: Scottish people are British, but they aren't Anglo-Saxons. British denotes geographic commonality, Anglo-Saxon denotes an ethnogeographic commonality (literally "Saxons of England"). Also, WASP didn't exist as a term of demarcation until the mid 20th century.

I think you will find that British denotes a ethnogeographic commonality too.
Yeah, and it was probably wealthy, not white, but as you yourself said, these things are arbitrary and malleable.

In actual colonial America, people identified themselves by an amalgam of colonial residency and specific sect. If you lived in Boston in, say, 1730, you were't a White Anglo-Saxon Protestant, you were likely just a Massachusetts Congregationalist.

In any case if we are to accept that the US were/are a Nation state, that Nation is White Europeans, Of some christian variety (or if you go back in time WASPs)

- - - Updated - - -

Just what we need, snooty European twats trying to tell us who is and isn't a real American, and with font choices that totally don't look like an amateurish conspiracy site. Stay the fuck away from our country please.

Is there such a thing as a 'real' american?

[Macaquerie]

Is there such a thing as a 'real' american?

We're a pretty inclusive society, anyone who wants to call themselves an American is a real American in my book. Much better than wasting time trying to reconcile 19th century ethnonatlionalism with modern day realities.

[Deleted]

We're a pretty inclusive society, anyone who wants to call themselves an American is a real American in my book. Much better than wasting time trying to reconcile 19th century ethnonatlionalism with modern day realities.

A category that does not discriminate is useless, but in any case, you seem to think that there is no american 'Nation'?
I don't disagree, but that's the conversation we are having.

[Elegiac]

A category that does not discriminate is useless

It being elective does not mean it does not discriminate.

but in any case, you seem to think that there is no american 'Nation'?

There isn't. The United States is an empire by every metric.

[Deleted]

It being elective does not mean it does not discriminate.

There isn't. The United States is an empire by every metric.

Just because it's an empire doesn't preclude there being a nation at the core.

[Plutarch78]

Can liberals move beyond identity politics?

FTFY

[Macaquerie]

A category that does not discriminate is useless, but in any case, you seem to think that there is no american 'Nation'?
I don't disagree, but that's the conversation we are having.

In America, nation just means country, country means state, and state means province, except they have the ability to make their own laws sometimes and also the electoral college for some reason. And because we're the majority of English speakers on the planet, our definitions are the correct ones.

[Lenonis]

Can liberals move beyond identity politics?

FTFY

"War on Christmas" is identity politics. True or false?

[Dontrike]

Can liberals move beyond identity politics?

FTFY

So nothing to add besides your whataboutism?

[Deleted]

In America, nation just means country,

I'm not going another 15 rounds on that - Nation does NOT mean country.

And because we're the majority of English speakers on the planet, our definitions are the correct ones.

No -

[Macaquerie]

I'm not going another 15 rounds on that - Nation does NOT mean country.

Whatever you think the word is supposed to mean, in practice just about everywhere the word "nation" is used, it means a political entity, not an ethnic group. And it's not hard to see why, the idea that there are distinct and cohesive nations going back to time immemorial is just utter hogwash and is unsupported by any historical record out there.