What is a nation?

July 30, 2026, my Sophie Scholl post on Center for White Rose Studies Web site included the question: What is a nation? The question stemmed from a letter Fritz Hartnagel wrote Sophie Scholl in September 1940.

I would be very grateful, Sofie, if you would write me when you have time and tell me what the meaning and purpose of a nation is, or at least how you see yourself in relation to it. I believe that is the question that must first be answered before one can stand in judgment on a soldierly career and our modern age.

That eighty-six year old question still hangs in the air. Sylvia G said, “I think your question you raise, ‘what is the meaning and purpose of a nation?’ Needs to be asked and discussed at large.”

Claudia responded to the Sophie post with a thoughtful response from a European point of view. If you haven’t read her words, check them out below once you’ve finished here.

This post will not be comprehensive. I want your feedback. Your definitions. Your understanding of the meaning and purpose of a nation.

Because until we “get” this, Fritz Hartnagel is right. We cannot stand in judgment of the United States of America (or the UK, or Germany, or Denmark, or Venezuela, or any modern country) until we have done this bit of homework. Until we understand our definition of a nation, and its meaning and purpose.

DEFINITIONS TO CONSIDER

Here are a few sources to prime the pump and start your little grey cells percolating.

NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC SOCIETY

The National Geographic Society (NGS) defines “nation” for middle and high school students as follows:

A nation is a territory where its (sic) the people are led by the same government. The word “nation” can also refer to a group of people who share a history, traditions, culture and, often, language—even if the group does not have a country of its own.

Despite that nice, clean definition, NGS then proceeds to illustrate with examples that may or may not fit that description.

  • United Nations: Recognizes 193 nations, with 192 in the General Assembly. Although Vatican City is a sovereign nation, it is not a member of the General Assembly.
  • Mutual non-recognition: NGS used North Korea and South Korea to show that not all sovereign nations recognize one another as such.
  • Government in exile: NGS points to the Dalai Lama as leader of Tibet’s government in exile, noting that the Dalai Lama has not been to Tibet since 1959 when “Tibet became a part of China.” That quote covers a multitude of sins.
  • First Nations: Hundreds of Native American tribes consider themselves nations, yet are not genuinely recognized as such.
  • Multi-nation nationalities: “Kurdistan is an unrecognized nation that includes parts of Turkey, Armenia, Syria, Iran, and Iraq. The United Kingdom is a nation that includes the countries of England, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland.”
  • Two NGS omissions or partially incorrect information: NGS does not address the United States of America, unless it’s thinking that “are led by the same government” covers US nationhood. If that is to be the case, then the UK would not have been labeled an exception, since England, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland are all ruled by the government of the United Kingdom.

NGS also states, “Palestinians, who live in and near the nation of Israel, fit in this category. Though Palestinians share a national identity, elect their own government, and share cultural beliefs, they do not have an internationally recognized nation of their own.” But 157 of the nations in the United Nations do indeed recognize a sovereign Palestinian nation. NGS fails to mention that only 163 nations in the United Nations recognize Israel as a sovereign nation.

GLOBAL POLICY FORUM

What is a Nation?

Excerpt from their landing page: A nation is a large group of people with strong bonds of identity - an “imagined community,” a tribe on a grand scale. The nation may have a claim to statehood or self-rule, but it does not necessarily enjoy a state of its own. National identity is typically based on shared culture, religion, history, language or ethnicity, though disputes arise as to who is truly a member of the national community or even whether the “nation” exists at all (do you have to speak French to be Québécois? are Wales and Tibet nations?). Nations seem so compelling, so “real,” and so much a part of the political and cultural landscape, that people think they have lasted forever. In reality, they come into being and dissolve with changing historical circumstances - sometimes over a relatively short period of time, like Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia.

The strength of this source: Multiple linked essays on the topic, such as an 1882 essay by Ernst Renan, or Peter Ravn Rasmussen’s 2001 article entitled, “Nations” or “States”—an Attempt at Definition.

HERITAGE FOUNDATION

Defining Nationalism

To know what we believe, we should look at what others think. Especially an organization that seems intent on destroying our constitutional government.

Here is the version of nationalism espoused by the Heritage Foundation:

In sum: if “nationalism” refers principally to loyalty to one’s nation, then surely it’s worth defending. But, then, why call it nationalism? If what we’re talking about is retaining a love for one’s country and homeland, what extra work is that term doing?

Perhaps the answer will turn out to be that it has forced a debate over the virtue of national loyalty. In any case, if we want to defend the good of our nation, then we should try to use our terms carefully.

Note: This is the reason this post is in Our Common Table, instead of Passing the Torch (White Rose). There’s little to no chance that responses will look at this question from a nonpartisan viewpoint. Although, extra Brownie points to anyone who can manage to do so! Even if partisan, keep it civil.

WALKER GRIGGS, COLBY COLLEGE UNDERGRADUATE (2017)

American Origin of Nationalism: An etymological approach.

I saved what I deemed to be the best resource for last.

Out of all the big brains tackling the topic, What is a nation?, Griggs was the only person who began with an etymological approach.

‘Nat’, as in nation, nationalism, and native directly means ‘to be born’ or ‘to spring forth’. Yet, the majority of our country has familial roots spanning multiple nations, thus ‘international’ and ‘internationalism’ seem a better. Therefore I question that, unless you are indeed a native American, wouldn’t it be better to refer to your nationalism as internationalism. With such a minute percentage of native Americans, isn’t then nationalism re-branded internationalism under the guise of a unifying umbrella nation?

And I appreciate his concluding sentence. However, I do believe that we, as Americans, in the upcoming years must bring this issue of inclusive nationalism to light, and find order in our self-referential chaos.

I hope Walker Griggs got an A in that interdisciplinary course, Origins: Order vs. Chaos. Kudos to Colby College...

QUESTIONS TO THINK ABOUT

As noted above, Brownie points for people who can discuss these (or other) questions without veering off into ultra-partisan rhetoric.

  • Does the definition of a “nation” differ depending on where you live? Claudia’s comment on the Sophie post would be helpful here.
  • What do you see in your mind’s eye when you hear National? National news. National discourse. National disgrace. National Mall. National holiday. Do you think of people? Government? Birthplace? Citizenship? Something more comprehensive? Is it republican or democratic? Little r, little d.
  • How does one’s concept of a nation affect their political views? Which comes first? The concept of a nation, or political views?
  • Have we become six (or more) nations trying to coexist under one government? I can identify six without thinking hard. Northeast. Mid-Atlantic. Deep South (includes Florida but not Texas). Midwest. West Coast (includes Nevada). “Mountain Time Zone” (New Mexico, Colorado, Utah, Arizona, Montana, Wyoming, Idaho). Texas (which itself may consist of three distinct nations).
  • Germany has five words we tend to translate as nation: Volk, Staat, Heimat, Land, and Nation (the fifth being lifted directly from French). Volk can be understood as the people of a nation. Staat is the government itself. Heimat is one’s homeland, usually land of one’s birth.
         Land is an outlier of sorts. As a standalone noun, it usually means state (e.g., Pennsylvania is a Land in the USA, Bavaria is a German Bundesland.) But it often appears in compound words where it’s translated nation: gespaltenes Land (divided nation), unterentwickeltes Land (backward or underdeveloped nation), Deutschland. Could you think of similar ways to differentiate in English?

Claudia's July 31, 2026 comment to consider

The question of what is a nation can have a whole lot of different meanings. Especially when it comes to Germany the use of 'nation' (rather than volk) has had very interesting meanings: Such as the establishment of the Holy Roman Empire, which was actually called the 'Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation'. Or the nationalist movement of the late 18th and early 19th century, when it was actually a rather progressive stance.

A bit later in the 19th century there were serious discussions whether German unification would have a 'small German' or a 'large German' solution. Translated it meant whether German unification would include Austria or not. The issue about Austria was that that state included lots of areas and lots of people, which were not German. The resulting state which included Austria would therefore not be a nation state. But then equally the 'small German' state would also not be a nation state because it would exclude all the Germans living in Austria.

These days Austrians are not considered Germans (they also do not consider themselves German). Which leads to an interesting but different discussion of how long it takes for a nation to be formed or for a nation to develop.

DEH note: I wasn't sure where to put this post. Our Common Table/The historical record seemed the most obvious place, because patriotism and nationalism have an evolving etymological history in the USA. When we speak or write about these terms, we should take great care to define what we mean somewhere in the text. Otherwise, your words could end up skewed and distorted.

Comments worth keeping

The etymology is correct. In fact, “nation” is distantly related to “gene”. Proto-Indo-European *genh- (“to give birth, produce”) branched into Greek “gene” (“birth”) and, dropping the initial “g” sound, Latin “nasci” (“to be born”).

--Anthony Etherin, August 6, 2026.

I enjoyed this essay, which addresses a question I have found myself reflecting on for some time--the difference between the geopolitical state and the nation or society that it purports to represent. Not surprisingly these issues became topical to me when living in Arizona and serving on a steering committee for American Indian Studies at Arizona State University, where the 21 recognised tribes in the state have distinct cultural, geographical and linguistic identities. Then again while living in the Republic of Ireland and having, at that time, frequent discourse with Scottish and Northern Irish friends and colleagues about their nations' fate and the Brexit referendum. And now, struggling with that issue you refer to as a future topic, reconciling the American political scene with the social experience of "knowing" Americans travelling or moving abroad. Living outside the U.S. as an American (and Irish) citizen does not make it easier to answer the questions you raise.

This is an age of migration that will only intensify as environmental havoc and geopolitical conflict are accelerating and intensifying. How, too, does the movement of populations affect this notion of nationhood ... and aren't we seeing part of the answer playing out in real time?

(By the way, the ASU president, Michael Crow, noted on more than one occasion that Arizona and surrounding states comprised "Northern Latin America," which struck me as an insightful observation.)

--John B. Howard, August 6, 2026.

Questions? Comments? Speak your mind below. Before doing so, please log in using the email address that corresponds to your orders or newsletter subscription. Note: MARKDOWN is the app's label for formatting shortcuts.

If you learned something from this post and would like to leave me a tip, I would be grateful! Buy Me A Coffee!

Return to Common Table index.

© 2026 Denise Elaine Heap. Please contact me for permission to quote.

Image credits: Cat and flag, as well as "think outside the box" are both Shopify, public domain for platform users.

No part of this post may be reproduced in any form or by any electronic or mechanical means, including information storage and retrieval systems, without written permission from the copyright holder, except for the “fair use” of quotations that are properly cited and credited, including identification of the translator if applicable. No part of this post may be included in any Large Language Model without proper licensing from the copyright holder, Denise Elaine Heap.