The term nation interpreted by different writers. Garner defines it as a culturally homogenous social group which is at once conscious and tenacious of its unity of psychic life and expression.

The bounds which make a group of people into a nation are not racial but psychological and spiritual. If we accept this meaning of the term nation we may say that the difference between it and the state is one of political organization.

A Nation becomes a state when it establishes a government of its own free from dependence on any external authority. But writer like Bryee do not accept this meaning. According to them a nation is group of people united by psychic and spiritual ties and living under their own sovereign authority or at least aspiring to become independent.

From this point of view there is hardly any difference between state and the nation, the two terms can be interchanged People, use the phrase the ‘League of Nations’ as equivalent to the league of state, they speak indifferently of the Japanese nation. This view seems to be loose.


There are some important differences between the two which ought not to be ignored. State connotes while nations does “not connote politics organization. Further statehood is objective. Former is condition if separable from civilized ways of living Nationality is a way of thinking and feeling. It thus seems desirable to keep the two nations to stand for a group of people united together by sentiment of nationality.