Nation-States and Proof of Existence
— Sovereignty, Legitimacy, and the Borders of Citizenship

Nation-states are not eternal. The Soviet Union lasted 70 years; Imperial Japan, 77.
What does it mean for "proof of existence" to depend on the nation-state framework? An examination of its limits and possibilities.

Key Takeaway: Nation-states do not last forever. Having proof of existence that does not depend on nationality or citizenship leads to more universal human rights protection.

*This essay is an academic analysis and does not advocate for any specific political or religious position.

1. The Lifespan of Nation-States — Sovereignty Does Not Endure

We tend to perceive nation-states as permanent fixtures. Yet history reveals that their lifespans are surprisingly short.

Even states considered long-lasting amount to mere moments on a 1000-year timescale. As Benedict Anderson observed, nation-states are "imagined communities," and their borders are always in flux (Anderson, 1983).

"The nation is an imagined political community—and imagined as both inherently limited and sovereign."

— Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities

This presents a fundamental problem. Many people belong to states through nationality and prove their existence through passports and citizenship. But when that state ceases to exist, what happens to that "proof"?

Proof of existence that depends on nation-states bears the structural constraint of state lifespan. Changes in sovereignty, territorial reorganization, state dissolution—in all these events, individual "records of existence" face crisis.

2. Citizens and Non-Citizens — Who Is Recognized as "Existing"?

Nation-states, by definition, distinguish between "citizens" and "non-citizens." This boundary directly determines whether one's existence can be proven.

The Arbitrariness of Nationality

For most people, nationality is something given at birth. However, it is not a universal right but merely a status granted by the state. Whether determined by blood (jus sanguinis) or birthplace (jus soli)—the criteria vary by country and have changed throughout history.

In The Origins of Totalitarianism, Hannah Arendt raised the problem of "the right to have rights." A person who loses nationality loses the standing to claim any rights. Stateless persons are placed in a condition that is legally equivalent to "not existing."

"The loss of human rights appears first and above all as the loss of a place in the world."

— Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism

Stateless Persons

According to UNHCR estimates, approximately 4.2 million stateless persons exist worldwide. They:

This represents an extreme form of "existence erasure." Not being recognized by any state is tantamount to socially "not existing."

Recognized as a Citizen Not Recognized as a Citizen
Recorded in official documents Excluded from records
Receives legal protection Placed outside the law
Positioned as a subject of history Erased from history
Records may persist after death No trace of existence remains

3. Peoples Without Sovereignty — Those Without Nation-States

Within the nation-state system, ethnic groups and peoples without sovereignty are structurally prone to exclusion from proof of existence.

Nations Without States

For these peoples, "state-based proof of existence" is doubly problematic. First, the state they would belong to either does not exist or is contested. Second, they may face discrimination and exclusion as minorities in their countries of residence.

Unrecognized States

In international society, whether an entity is recognized as a state depends on political judgment.

The proof of existence for people living in these regions is subject to the dynamics of international politics. Passports not recognized, access to international institutions denied—their "existence" is conditioned by international consensus.

4. Empire, Colonialism, and the Erasure of Existence

Throughout history, conquerors have erased the existence of the conquered. Banning languages, destroying cultures, rewriting history—this constitutes systematic denial of proof of existence.

Linguistic Annihilation

Language is a vessel for collective memory. Losing a language means losing the knowledge, stories, and worldviews accumulated in that language.

The extinction of a language is also the extinction of "existences narrated" in that language. Oral histories, ancestors' names, memories of the land—all are lost with the language.

Rewriting History

Conquerors rewrite the history of the conquered. Or they simply do not write it. Under colonial rule, only history from the rulers' perspective is recorded as "official history," while the perspectives of the ruled are excluded.

"History is written by the victors"—this adage succinctly expresses the inequality of proof of existence. Those with the power to keep records determine whose existence gets recorded.

Imperialism and colonialism were not merely physical domination but also domination of memory and records. Erasing the "traces of existence" of the conquered constructed the legitimacy of rule.

5. Nationalism and Individual Narratives

Nation-states give meaning to individual existence by defining people as "citizens." Yet simultaneously, that meaning becomes subordinate to the state's narrative.

Individuals Subsumed into National Narratives

States construct "national history." Within this narrative, individuals are positioned as "citizens." Soldiers who fought in wars, great figures who contributed to nation-building, cultural figures who represent the nation—these people are preserved as "national memory."

However, being subsumed into national narrative also means individual stories become subordinate to state logic.

Individuals Excluded from National Narratives

Conversely, individuals who do not fit national narratives are excluded from records.

As Michel Foucault observed, power determines "what is spoken and what is not spoken." States possess the power to choose whose existence to record and whose to leave unrecorded.

6. The Possibility of Proof of Existence Beyond Nation-States

The analysis above reveals the structural limits of state-dependent proof of existence. Is proof of existence beyond nation-states possible?

Religion and Trans-National Records

Historically, religions have built record systems transcending nation-states. Catholic baptismal records, Islamic waqf documents, Buddhist temple death registers—these have recorded individual existence beyond national frameworks.

Religious organizations are often more long-lived than states. The Catholic Church spans approximately 2000 years; some Buddhist temples have survived over 1000 years. Religious records may persist even when states dissolve.

Possibilities in the Digital Age

The internet and digital technology have opened possibilities for records independent of states.

However, digital technology is also subject to state regulation and corporate policies. Truly state-independent proof of existence may require combination with physical media.

The Position of Toki Storage

Toki Storage positions itself as one response to this problem.

Nation-states are important infrastructure for proof of existence, but not the only infrastructure. Building record systems that transcend state lifespans, borders, and political fluctuations enables more universal proof of existence.

Conclusion — Beyond Sovereignty

Nation-states have functioned as the primary infrastructure for proof of existence in modernity. Family registers, passports, citizenship—these are systems by which states recognize and record individual existence.

But nation-states do not endure. Borders change, sovereignty transfers, states dissolve. In these processes, proof of existence dependent on states faces crisis.

More serious still is the existence of those never recognized by states—stateless persons, refugees, ethnic minorities, political dissidents. For them, state-based proof of existence is also a tool of exclusion and oppression.

This is precisely why the possibility of proof of existence beyond nation-states matters.

"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights."

— Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1

Realizing this ideal requires infrastructure for proof of existence independent of states. A system where all people—regardless of nationality, ethnicity, language, or political stance—can leave proof that "I existed here."

This may sound idealistic. Yet it is becoming technically possible. Quartz glass and distributed storage, international standards and physical preservation—these combinations enable proof of existence that stands outside sovereignty.

One thousand years from now, no one knows what current borders will look like. Yet the fact that "one human being existed here" can hold meaning across borders. This is the core of universal proof of existence.

References

  • Anderson, B. (1983). Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. Verso.
  • Arendt, H. (1951). The Origins of Totalitarianism. Schocken Books.
  • Foucault, M. (1975). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Vintage Books.
  • Hobsbawm, E. & Ranger, T. (1983). The Invention of Tradition. Cambridge University Press.
  • Said, E. W. (1978). Orientalism. Pantheon Books.
  • Scott, J. C. (1998). Seeing Like a State. Yale University Press.
  • UNHCR (2023). Global Trends: Forced Displacement in 2022.