Message from @Deleted User
Discord ID: 624741244085600257
why is that? are you jewish?
no thats a ''nation'' not a ''nation state''
nations have existed as long as people
nation states formed as a hierarchal offshoot
bro u just called me jewish im really triggered
a nation-state doesn't necessitate the functionalities of a state, why do you keep bringing this up? Marx was very pro national soverignty and I'd point you to his writings on the irish, poles and romanians for that if you don't believe me, why would this man hold contrary views ?
why is everybody willing to go to wikipedia to use as sources on ideologies in debates against their ideological enemy but don’t like it when someone does the same to theirs
why do you keep twisting words?
>higherarchical offshoot
what
why do you fall back on vacuous platitudes to explain your semantics argument which is clearly wrong
afraid to admit you're illiterate?
Like Bruh you can’t use wikipedia to define communism but then get mad when someone uses wikipedia to define your ideology
I don't even bother with that, it's too petty
no i said nation states not nations
you could argue for a form of stateless nationalism however since nationalism is
defined by its sovereignty it would be sort of stupid
Nation-states do not neccesitate the functions of a state for them to be existant, why do you keep going on a loop
what's wrong with you pal?
when did i get pissy about wikis
are you mad because i dont believe the mainstream narratives on the congo @DoobyCooby
nations
not nation states
Nation-state is another name for a country solidified under a rule, why do you think it automatically implies the functionality of a state
I don't even know what you're talking about dude
you brought in nationalism
clearly
which is irrelevant to this discussion
right lemme show you
i never claimed marxists advocated for the abolition of nations lol
@Deleted User what
no
I’m just confused why people do that, use wikipedia to define a person’s ideology and base their argument off of what is on wiki but then get uppity when someone does the same
Some of the smaller European states were not so ethnically diverse, but were also dynastic states, ruled by a royal house. Their territory could expand by royal intermarriage or merge with another state when the dynasty merged. In some parts of Europe, notably Germany, very small territorial units existed. They were recognized by their neighbors as independent, and had their own government and laws. Some were ruled by princes or other hereditary rulers, some were governed by bishops or abbots. Because they were so small, however, they had no separate language or culture: the inhabitants shared the language of the surrounding region.
In some cases these states were simply overthrown by nationalist uprisings in the 19th century. Liberal ideas of free trade played a role in German unification, which was preceded by a customs union, the Zollverein. However, the Austro-Prussian War, and the German alliances in the Franco-Prussian War, were decisive in the unification. The Austro-Hungarian Empire and the Ottoman Empire broke up after the First World War, and the Russian Empire became the Soviet Union after the Russian Civil War.
well it wouldnt be me @DoobyCooby
@Deleted User what are you c+v' ing at me
this clear cut defines a monarchy, a monarchy does not necessitate or use a state. The word state in conjuncture with nation means something completley different to states
your own wiki page
anyway
enjoy being a lulcow
what are you talking about?
i did my job
yes you shit your pants and everyone had to smell it
well done! @Deleted User
i made you look like a clown