Which of the following is an accurate comparison of the positions expressed by the authors of the two sources regarding the idea that existing political boundaries should be changed so that each nation has its own state?

Question

Accepted Answer

To provide an accurate response, I would need the actual content of the two sources being referenced in the question. Since the question is about comparing the positions of the authors regarding changing political boundaries for nations to have their own state, without the sources, I cannot give a specific comparison. However, I can provide a general framework for how to approach such a question: ∻Answer∻ ⚹ Without the specific sources, a direct comparison cannot be provided. Please provide the text or main ideas of the two sources for an accurate comparison. ⚹ ∻Key Concept∻ ⚹ The concept of national self-determination and the redrawing of political boundaries has been a significant issue in world history, particularly in the context of decolonization and the aftermath of major conflicts such as World War I and World War II. ⚹ ∻Explanation∻ ⚹ In general, when comparing authors' positions on changing political boundaries for nations to have their own state, one would look at their arguments for or against the principle of national self-determination, the historical context they are writing in, and the potential consequences they foresee. This could involve examining their views on the legitimacy of existing boundaries, the importance of ethnic, linguistic, or cultural homogeneity within a state, and the potential for conflict or peace that boundary changes might bring. ⚹ Please provide the sources for a specific comparison.◊How did the authors of the two sources differ in their views on the idea of changing political boundaries to establish nation-states?⍭ Generate me a similar question◊

Sia