• Saleh@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    12 days ago

    Passports weren’t a general concept until the end of the 19th century. Before they were mostly to allow passage to certain areas inside one country, rather than for movement between countries. There have been Identifications for Nobels and Diplomats though.

    Anyways the whole concept is mostly a concept of modern nation states not of ancient tribalism.

    • kn33@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      12 days ago

      I think the point is that the tribalism led to the creation of the nations/states in the first place. I don’t know enough to know if that’s true, but that was my interpretation of their comment.

      • Juice@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        12 days ago

        The state is formed by the historical mode of production, its like a contradiction that is the resolution to all of the other contradictions present in market social relations. In other words the state is based on how stuff gets made, and who accumulates the value inherent in the stuff, which is in essence the congealed work that went into making that stuff.

        Politics and culture is always a factor in what shape the state takes, since politics and culture are social structures and sources of power themselves, but politics is downstream from production

      • Dragon Rider (drag)@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        12 days ago

        Drag has seen criticism of the term “tribalism” as it normalises the idea that tribes were bad. Tribes were actually way more sensible than modern governments. Blaming the unique problems of developed societies on indigenous tribes is kinda messed up. Sectarianism is a better word.