"Tribal" vs "Imperial" Nations in Europe

[ЛыSSый]

There are two terms: nation state which refers to the homogenous country, where the majority of population is of same nationality - for example Hungary, Estonia or Poland; and multinational state which consists of various nationalities living in one country - for instance Russia or Spain. I think by "tribal" you may refer to the nation state, and by "imperial" to multinational.

in estonia is about ewery third person is russian
in poland were a lot of tribes like gurals, jews or tatars (tell me about their percentage), but goverment policy is accimilation
in russia is more than 80% persents of population are russia, but goverment policy is support of minorities cultures

[Bezprym]

in estonia is about ewery third person is russian

I think less, but true, my mistake.

in poland were a lot of tribes like gurals,

Górale are Poles. They just cultivate their unique customs and traditions.

jews or tatars (tell me about their percentage), but goverment policy is accimilation

Jews and Tatars are not numerous, there are few of them. I am not sure if they even together would be able to make up 1% of general population.

in russia is more than 80% persents of population are russia, but goverment policy is support of minorities cultures

...sure

[Rethel]

in poland were a lot of tribes like gurals, jews or tatars (tell me about their percentage), but goverment policy is accimilation

They do not have to be assimilated becasue they are Poles allready.

Jews - 3000 belivers, another 4500 feeling Jews.
Tatars - between 500 and 3000
Górals - tens of thousands.

They together do not even conatin 1%.

[Mikula]

As I understand the question is about country's identity versus ethnical identity.
Am I right?

Perhaps a good illustration is different meanings of the term Nation/National in various countries.

In western Euro countries it refers about the country.

But if you translate terms Nation/National to Czech language, it sounds Národ/Národní and it refers about ethnical group of the same native language.
To avoid the misunderstanding is the term Nationality typed in passports translated as Státní občanství (Country's citizenship).

In Czech census records was never used term Race (white, black etc.) but Národnost (ethnicity).
When I fulfill the cesus frorm I write:
Státní občanství: Česká Republika = Country's citizenship: Czech Republic
Národnost: Česká = Ethnicity: Czech

But for example pop-singer Ewa Farna, who came from Polish speaking part of our country will fullfill the for this way:
Státní občanství: Česká Republika = Country's citizenship: Czech Republic
Národnost: Poská = Ethnicity: Polish

The different understanding of the terms means that Czech people of my generation (and older ones), even the admirers of Franz Kafka has a problem to call him as a Czech writer.
He was not Czech in ethnical meaning: He wrote hisbooks in German language. He was bilingual, he speaks Czech as well as German but German was his native laguage.
In the country's meaning he was not Czech, too - he was citizen of Austro-Hungary, and later of Czechoslovakia.
He could be called as an Austrian and Czechoslovak writer.
According the language or ethnicity he could be labelled also as a German and Jewish writer.
But in the last decades, because of westernization of our country, the meanings of some terms are changing here, and especially younger generations call Franz Kafka as a Czech writer without any problems.

[Rethel]

And how is ethnicity in czech, i.e. ethnical group without a state?

[Ülev]

And how is ethnicity in czech, i.e. ethnical group without a state?

please do not irritate Magnolia

[Rethel]

please do not irritate Magnolia

Why? and why?

[Mikula]

And how is ethnicity in czech, i.e. ethnical group without a state?

Národ has a state.
Národnost is an ethnical grooup, regarless one has its own state or not

[joewhite]

hungary vs italy

[Peterski]

"Tribal" are small nations like Montenegrins or Czechs, "imperial" are large nations like French or Germans. Then you have "intermediate" or "medium" nations, many of which have imperial past.

IMO Poles fall into the "intermediate" group, but on the larger end of its spectrum (close to "imperial", and with imperial past). Hungarians also fall into the "medium" group, but on the smaller end.

You can't just look at modern population sizes, but also at population history of each nation/ethnicity. For example Hungarian-speakers were almost as numerous back in year 1900 as today.

Hungarians were among nations with the lowest birth rates during the 20th century.