Topic: Why do you think Hague and Harrop (2010:15) describe a nation as "a more elusive concept than a state?"
             The differences between a nation and a state have been defined by many academics. The concept of a nation is more difficult to understand than the concept of a state because of how the understanding of the term, "nation" is ever changing throughout the populations of the world. The difference between a state and a nation is that a state has defined attributes, such as a specific landmass and defined borders that make it recognizable. Nations don't always have similar features. They note four different scenarios in which an area can become rendered a nation. This widens the possibilities for ways to define the term, "nation."
             The concept of a nation can be seen as modern or ancient, depending on the opinion. The basic concept of a nation is viewed as 'any group that upholds a claim to be regarded as one' (Hague & Harrop, 2010). In more detailed terms a nation is a community of people who lay claim to common history, culture, region or ancestry. There can still be a link between a nation and a place. This link can be considered a distinguishing factor between a tribe or ethnic group and a nation. But it is still not a defining factor, because even a common language shared does not mean it is a nation. An example of this would be to describe French-speaking Canadians as a separate nation, as opposed to a multi-ethnic group in the community, indicating a diversity in the group but no independence for this group.
             The state is more easily defined because of the set parameters that we use to describe it, but even with this so, the criteria for a state can overlap with the criteria demarcating a nation. A nation does require a state to work, but, when joined, the state is similar to being the operator and the nation the engine powering it. A state does have 'defined borders' (Hague & Harrop, 2010) t...