It's all very nice to talk about how, as Stef says, "Greece does not exist" (in that the land that calls itself does, the critical masses of people with guns do, and large amounts of people within that area describe themselves as "Greek," yet the nation - the emergent entity of 'nation' is just a concept and has no physical manifestation) and how concepts shouldn't take over thinking, but after thinking a while I've decided that I'd like to submit a concrete example of this, and I'd like to know what you all think of it:
Sealand.
For those of you who don't know: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealand
Ask a statist if Sealand is a nation. If he says no, then ask him how it could become a nation. Since there is no objective measure of "nation, " rather, sovereignty is decided by the consensus of others, and the only difference between the national status of Sealand and the national status of the United States of America is that one is recognized by more people. Since people's opinion on something cannot change its non-conceptual attributes, it certainly can't bring Sealand's nation-ness into being.
How's that for an idea? Criticism, or any ideas?