Some nation-states like the U.S. are designed for all ethnic groups, whereas countries like Armenia and France belong to particular ethnic groups of a certain language and background. The question I have is what typology of states should exist if indeed countries like the U.S., which ties its people together based on the principle of collective, democratic individualism, are able to survive without paying respect to one ethnic group over another. If what truly ties people together is belief more than anything, this goes to show that nations merely need a universal, common language and a strong constitution to be natural, and most just. Nations and ethnic groups can exist within larger states/countries, in which they can be guaranteed protection and civil liberties. The struggle then, is establishing sovereignty in a violently competitive world. Most nations in the Middle East, like Saudi and Iran are not structured this way, but rather, around extremist and theocratic ideologies, leaving out secular, moderate and liberal forces. How can these nations expect to survive — autonomously — with a constant threat from outside? Which nation-states will endure? Which are most just? Which are most free? These are all important social questions that help us understand why the world is plagued by conflict and unrest.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: