What’s Harari’s justification/evidence for the following statement – why are they imagined?

What’s Harari’s justification/evidence for the following statement – why are they imagined?
“The nation is the imagined community of the state. The consumer tribe is the imagined community of the market.”
What is/are the main argument/s that Harari puts forward in the section “The Collapse of the Family and Community” (p.398 – 405)? Do you agree with the characterisation of the role of states, markets and individuals as defined by the section? Why or why not?
Examine Zuboff’s arguments in “The Two Modernities” What does the author mean by ‘individualization’, and how it progress or change between the first and the second modernity? How do you feel about Zuboff’s narrative, do you agree or disagree and why?
While Harari and Zuboff touch on similar themes, they adapt different approaches both in the kinds of evidence they present and the way they tell their stories – Comment on these differences, do you find one more persuasive than the other? Why?
The total word count should be between 1200-1600 words
Rubric
Short Answer Rubric – FS (1) (1) (1)
Short Answer Rubric – FS (1) (1) (1)
Criteria    Ratings    Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDepth and Accuracy of Answer
2.5 pts
Exceptional
The answers are accurate, perceptive and reflects awareness of the complexities and depth of the text. The student makes discerning connections across the text, or offers a unique and insightful perspective.
2 pts
Skilled
The answers are reasonable and goes beyond a literal reading of the text. They explain specifically enough to show that the student can make appropriate connections across the text and draw valid conclusions.
1.75 pts
Competent
The answers are reasonable and go beyond a literal reading of the text. However the explanations are too generic, or non-specific. While they show that the student can make appropriate connections across the text they do not highlight all of the most salient aspects, or do so ineffectively
1.5 pts
Average
The answers are reasonable, but represents only a surface level reading of the text.
1 pts
Poor
The answer is not an answer to the question asked. The answer is incorrect because it is not based on the text. The answer is too general, vague, or unclear to determine whether it is reasonable. No answer is present.
0 pts
No Marks
2.5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDepth and Accuracy of Textual Evidence
2.5 pts
Exceptional
The text evidence used to support the idea is specific and well chosen. The combination of the answer and the text evidence demonstrates a deep understanding of the text.
2 pts
Skilled
The text evidence used to support the idea is accurate and relevant. The idea and text evidence used to support it are clearly linked. The combination of the idea and the text evidence demonstrates a good understanding of the text.
1.75 pts
Competent
The text evidence used to support the idea is accurate and mostly relevant. The idea and text evidence used to support it are linked. The combination of the idea and the text evidence demonstrates a reasonable understanding of the text, but there are more relevant passages or instances which could have been used, or the links drawn more clearly.
1.5 pts
Average
The text evidence is only a general reference to the text, too partial to support the idea, weakly linked to the idea, or used inappropriately because it wrongly manipulates the meaning of the text.
1 pts
Poor
No textual evidence is present.
0 pts
No Marks
2.5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDepth and Accuracy of Explanation
2.5 pts
Exceptional
The explanation adds depth and complexity to the overall response, clearly and insightfully linking the answer to the textual evidence.
2 pts
Skilled
The explanation elaborates on the original response, and links the answer to the textual evidence.
1.75 pts
Competent
The explanation elaborates on the original response, and attempts to link the answer to the textual evidence. The explanation is however convoluted or lacks effectiveness, adding only minimally to the textual evidence presented.
1.5 pts
Average
The explanation merely repeats the original answer.
1 pts
Poor
No explanation is present, or an explanation is present, but introduces an idea that is inaccurate because it cannot be supported by the text.
0 pts
No Marks
2.5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeGrammar, Punctuation and Structure
2.5 pts
Exceptional
The writer demonstrates a consistent command of spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, and usage conventions. In addition the answers are well-structured presenting a clear and logical argument, making effective use of sentence and paragraph structure, presenting ideas coherently and cogently.
2 pts
Skilled
The writer demonstrates sufficient command of sentence boundaries, spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, and usage conventions, although minor errors may detract from the cohesion of the response. While effective use has been made of paragraphs, the ideas could have been presented more coherently and cogently.
1.75 pts
Competent
The writer demonstrates sufficient command of sentence boundaries, spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, and usage conventions, although minor errors may detract from the cohesion of the response. More effective use could have been made of paragraphs and sentences structures and the ideas could have been presented more coherently and cogently.
1.5 pts
Average
The writer demonstrates only a limited command of sentence boundaries, spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, and usage conventions, and errors detract from the cohesion of the response.
1 pts
Poor
The writer demonstrates an extremely limited command of sentence boundaries, spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, and usage conventions, and frequent errors detract from the success of the response.
0 pts
No Marks
2.5 pts
Total Points: 10