The consensus in the nineteenth century

Nationalism was a defining force in nineteenth-century Europe. Since the end of the Napoleonic Wars, the idea that citizens owed allegiance to the nation rather than to a king or dynastic ruler gained force. National identity was based on a shared cultural heritage, including language and ethnicity. Leaders like Camillo Benso di Cavour in Piedmont and Otto von Bismarck in Prussia understood the growing power of nationalism and successfully harnessed it to help create the new nation-states of Italy and Germany. Their success encouraged some ethnic groups in the Austrian Empire to seek their own political independence, making nationalism a divisive force in Austria.

Increasingly, the consensus in the nineteenth century was that a state should be more or less equivalent with the nation and that nations should have the right to self-determination. It seems like a natural process of history.

Compare 19th century national self-determination or nationalism to nationalism today. Use specific examples to support you points and argument with the similarities and differences during these 2 eras.
Was the multiculturalism that is found in many countries today similar or different to the environment of the late 19th century Germany or Italy? Why or why not? Provide supporting examples here.
Identify a “nation” today that does not have a state. Explain the current situation of your identified peoples and how this came to be. Be specific and support your selection with sources.
Provide specific examples for your points and conclusions and a minimum of 3 credible authored in your submission along with short bios of your authors.