It’s less of a legal distinction and more of a definition thing. He is objectively using the wrong word.
It would not be incorrect to refer to the people of Puerto Ricans as a nation by the definition of the word. The word nation does not refer to a place but a group of people.
Kurdistan doesn’t really have a central government like that, nor fixed or well defined borders. Keep in mind that the concept of a “Nation State” is really only a couple hundred years old.
If that counterexample doesn’t satisfy you, then Somalia should. It is a country without a functioning government, which has two nations inside of them of the northern and southern Somalians which are completely different, and neither of which have any sort of unifying government.
It’s less of a legal distinction and more of a definition thing. He is objectively using the wrong word.
It would not be incorrect to refer to the people of Puerto Ricans as a nation by the definition of the word. The word nation does not refer to a place but a group of people.
Both words refer to both concepts.
This definition is not fully correct. A nation does not need to have a government. For example the Kurds
Yes but my point is that he’s not using the wrong word.
Edit: also Kurdistan exists
Kurdistan doesn’t really have a central government like that, nor fixed or well defined borders. Keep in mind that the concept of a “Nation State” is really only a couple hundred years old.
If that counterexample doesn’t satisfy you, then Somalia should. It is a country without a functioning government, which has two nations inside of them of the northern and southern Somalians which are completely different, and neither of which have any sort of unifying government.
They used the right word in common speak, any other word would feel out of place.