Re: States?

["Chris Lotz" <chrislotz@hotmail.com>]

>Just a thought, but it seems that there would be a DISTINCT difference 
if the
>word "states" was used instead of nations. Aside from the obvious 
levels of
>Hawaii vs the United States of America, there is also a lot of 
literature that
>would cloud things, and significantly expand the topic. For example, a 
lot
>of revolutionary movements could meet some definitions of states. 
>
>Mark

I beg to differ with you, Mark.  I think the term "states" would be far 
more limiting and restrictive (for better or worse;  better in my 
opinion) than would the moniker "nations."  In fact, I think you have 
interpreted the two terms so as to reverse their meanings.  Having 
completed several courses on global politics and geography, I understand 
the term state to denote an entity which has some form of government, 
possesses internationally recognized boundaries, and may be comprised of 
many nations.  Nations however, may be nothing more than small groups of 
varying cultures, ethnicities, origins, beliefs, etc., and thus may be 
subsets of states.  Hence, I think the topic wording committee would be 
well advised to employ the phrase ASEAN member states (or the like) in 
order to place some limit on the object of the resolution and to attempt 
to lay the foundation for defenses against  cases which only focus 
attention/aid/whatever on tiny nations.

-Chris Lotz
Trinity debate


---------------------------------------------------------
Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
---------------------------------------------------------

---

• Prev by Date: No Southeast Asia
• Next by Date: Re: States?
• Prev by thread: States?
• Next by thread: Re: States?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

---

Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page