Citizenship: A Very Short Introduction VERY SHORT INTRODUCTIONS are for anyone wanting a stimulating and accessible way in to a new subject. They are written by experts, and have been published in more than 25 languages worldwide. The series began in 1995, and now represents a wide variety of topics in history, philosophy, religion, science, and the humanities. Over the next few years it will grow to a library of around 200 volumes – a Very Short Introduction to everything from ancient Egypt and Indian philosophy to conceptual art and cosmology.

Very Short Introductions available now:

AFRICAN HISTORY CHAOS Leonard Smith John Parker and Richard Rathbone CHOICE THEORY Michael Allingham AMERICAN POLITICAL PARTIES CHRISTIAN ART Beth Williamson AND ELECTIONS L. Sandy Maisel CHRISTIANITY Linda Woodhead THE AMERICAN PRESIDENCY CITIZENSHIP Richard Bellamy Charles O. Jones CLASSICS Mary Beard and ANARCHISM Colin Ward John Henderson ANCIENT EGYPT Ian Shaw CLASSICAL MYTHOLOGY ANCIENT PHILOSOPHY Julia Annas Helen Morales ANCIENT WARFARE CLAUSEWITZ Michael Howard Harry Sidebottom THE COLD WAR Robert McMahon ANGLICANISM Mark Chapman CONSCIOUSNESS Susan Blackmore THE ANGLO-SAXON AGE John Blair CONTEMPORARY ART ANIMAL RIGHTS David DeGrazia Julian Stallabrass Antisemitism Steven Beller CONTINENTAL PHILOSOPHY ARCHAEOLOGY Paul Bahn Simon Critchley ARCHITECTURE Andrew Ballantyne COSMOLOGY Peter Coles ARISTOTLE Jonathan Barnes THE CRUSADES Christopher Tyerman ART HISTORY Dana Arnold CRYPTOGRAPHY ART THEORY Cynthia Freeland Fred Piper and Sean Murphy THE HISTORY OF ASTRONOMY DADA AND SURREALISM Michael Hoskin David Hopkins ATHEISM Julian Baggini DARWIN Jonathan Howard AUGUSTINE Henry Chadwick THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS AUTISM Uta Frith Timothy Lim BARTHES Jonathan Culler DEMOCRACY Bernard Crick BESTSELLERS John Sutherland DESCARTES Tom Sorell THE BIBLE John Riches DESIGN John Heskett THE BRAIN Michael O’Shea DINOSAURS David Norman BRITISH POLITICS Anthony Wright DOCUMENTARY FILM BUDDHA Michael Carrithers Patricia Aufderheide BUDDHISM Damien Keown DREAMING J. Allan Hobson BUDDHIST ETHICS Damien Keown DRUGS Leslie Iversen CAPITALISM James Fulcher THE EARTH Martin Redfern CATHOLICISM Gerald O’Collins ECONOMICS Partha Dasgupta THE CELTS Barry Cunliffe EGYPTIAN MYTH Geraldine Pinch EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY BRITAIN INDIAN PHILOSOPHY Sue Hamilton Paul Langford INTELLIGENCE Ian J. Deary THE ELEMENTS Philip Ball INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION EMOTION Dylan Evans Khalid Koser EMPIRE Stephen Howe INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS ENGELS Terrell Carver Paul Wilkinson ETHICS Simon Blackburn ISLAM Malise Ruthven THE EUROPEAN UNION John Pinder JOURNALISM Ian Hargreaves and Simon Usherwood JUDAISM Norman Solomon EVOLUTION JUNG Anthony Stevens Brian and Deborah Charlesworth KABBALAH Joseph Dan EXISTENTIALISM Thomas Flynn KAFKA Ritchie Robertson FASCISM Kevin Passmore KANT Roger Scruton FEMINISM Margaret Walters KIERKEGAARD Patrick Gardiner THE FIRST WORLD WAR THE KORAN Michael Cook Michael Howard LAW Raymond Wacks FOSSILS Keith Thomson LINGUISTICS Peter Matthews FOUCAULT Gary Gutting LITERARY THEORY Jonathan Culler FREE WILL Thomas Pink LOCKE John Dunn THE FRENCH REVOLUTION LOGIC Graham Priest William Doyle MACHIAVELLI Quentin Skinner FREUD Anthony Storr THE MARQUIS DE SADE John Phillips FUNDAMENTALISM Malise Ruthven MARX Peter Singer GALAXIES John Gribbin MATHEMATICS Timothy Gowers GALILEO Stillman Drake THE MEANING OF LIFE Game Theory Ken Binmore Terry Eagleton GANDHI Bhikhu Parekh MEDICAL ETHICS Tony Hope GEOGRAPHY John A. Matthews and MEDIEVAL BRITAIN David T. Herbert John Gillingham and Ralph A. Griffiths GEOPOLITICS Klaus Dodds MEMORY Jonathan Foster GERMAN LITERATURE Nicholas Boyle MODERN ART David Cottington GLOBAL CATASTROPHES Bill McGuire MODERN CHINA Rana Mitter GLOBALIZATION Manfred Steger MODERN IRELAND Senia Pašeta GLOBAL WARMING Mark Maslin MOLECULES Philip Ball THE GREAT DEPRESSION AND MORMONISM THE NEW DEAL Eric Rauchway Richard Lyman Bushman HABERMAS James Gordon Finlayson MUSIC Nicholas Cook HEGEL Peter Singer MYTH Robert A. Segal HEIDEGGER Michael Inwood NATIONALISM Steven Grosby HIEROGLYPHS Penelope Wilson NELSON MANDELA Elleke Boehmer HINDUISM Kim Knott THE NEW TESTAMENT AS HISTORY John H. Arnold LITERATURE Kyle Keefer HISTORY of Life Michael Benton NEWTON Robert Iliffe THE HISTORY OF MEDICINE NIETZSCHE Michael Tanner William Bynum NINETEENTH-CENTURY BRITAIN HIV/AIDS Alan Whiteside Christopher Harvie and HOBBES Richard Tuck H. C. G. Matthew HUMAN EVOLUTION Bernard Wood NORTHERN IRELAND HUMAN RIGHTS Andrew Clapham Marc Mulholland HUME A. J. Ayer NUCLEAR WEAPONS IDEOLOGY Michael Freeden Joseph M. Siracusa THE OLD TESTAMENT THE RUSSIAN REVOLUTION Michael D. Coogan S. A. Smith PARTICLE PHYSICS Frank Close SCHIZOPHRENIA PAUL E. P. Sanders Chris Frith and Eve Johnstone PHILOSOPHY Edward Craig SCHOPENHAUER PHILOSOPHY OF LAW Christopher Janaway Raymond Wacks SCIENCE AND RELIGION PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Thomas Dixon Samir Okasha SEXUALITY Véronique Mottier PHOTOGRAPHY Steve Edwards SHAKESPEARE Germaine Greer PLATO Julia Annas SIKHISM Eleanor Nesbitt POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY David Miller SOCIAL AND CULTURAL POLITICS Kenneth Minogue ANTHROPOLOGY POSTCOLONIALISM Robert Young John Monaghan and Peter Just POSTMODERNISM Christopher Butler SOCIALISM Michael Newman POSTSTRUCTURALISM SOCIOLOGY Steve Bruce Catherine Belsey SOCRATES C. C. W. Taylor PREHISTORY Chris Gosden THE SPANISH CIVIL WAR PRESOCRATIC PHILOSOPHY Helen Graham Catherine Osborne SPINOZA Roger Scruton PSYCHIATRY Tom Burns STUART BRITAIN John Morrill PSYCHOLOGY TERRORISM Charles Townshend Gillian Butler and Freda McManus THEOLOGY David F. Ford THE QUAKERS Pink Dandelion THE HISTORY OF TIME QUANTUM THEORY Leofranc Holford-Strevens John Polkinghorne TRAGEDY Adrian Poole RACISM Ali Rattansi THE TUDORS John Guy RELATIVITY Russell Stannard TWENTIETH-CENTURY BRITAIN RELIGION IN AMERICA Timothy Beal Kenneth O. Morgan THE RENAISSANCE Jerry Brotton THE UNITED NATIONS RENAISSANCE ART Jussi M. Hanhimäki Geraldine A. Johnson THE VIETNAM WAR ROMAN BRITAIN Peter Salway Mark Atwood Lawrence THE ROMAN EMPIRE THE VIKINGS Julian Richards Christopher Kelly WITTGENSTEIN A. C. Grayling ROUSSEAU Robert Wokler WORLD MUSIC Philip Bohlman RUSSELL A. C. Grayling THE WORLD TRADE RUSSIAN LITERATURE Catriona Kelly ORGANIZATION Amrita Narlikar

Available Soon:

APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS Paul Foster NOTHING Frank Close Expressionism Katerina Reed-Tsocha PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION FREE SPEECH Nigel Warburton Jack Copeland and Diane Proudfoot MODERN JAPAN SCOTLAND Rab Houston Christopher Goto-Jones STATISTICS David Hand

For more information visit our websites www.oup.com/uk/vsi www.oup.com/us Richard Bellamy Citizenship

A Very Short Introduction

1 1 Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX26DP Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide in Oxford New York Auckland Cape Town Dar es Salaam Hong Kong Karachi Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Nairobi New Delhi Shanghai Taipei Toronto With offices in Argentina Austria Brazil Chile Czech Republic France Greece Guatemala Hungary Italy Japan Poland Portugal Singapore South Korea Switzerland Thailand Turkey Ukraine Vietnam Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries PublishedintheUnitedStates by Oxford University Press Inc., New York c Richard Bellamy 2008 The moral rights of the author have been asserted Database right Oxford University Press (maker) First Published 2008 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above You must not circulate this book in any other binding or cover and you must impose the same condition on any acquirer British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Data available Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Bellamy, Richard (Richard Paul) Citizenship : a very short introduction / Richard Bellamy. p. cm. Includes index. ISBN 978–0–19–280253–8 1. Citizenship. I. Title. JF801.B454 2008 323.6–dc22 2008031644 ISBN 978–0–19–280253–8 13579108642 Typeset by SPI Publisher Services, Pondicherry, India Printed in Great Britain by Ashford Colour Press Ltd, Gosport, Hampshire Contents

Preface ix

List of illustrations xi 1 What is citizenship, and why does it matter? 1 2 Theories of citizenship and their history 27 3 Membership and belonging 52 4 Rights and the ‘right to have rights’ 78 5 Participation and democracy 97 Further reading 124

Index 129 This page intentionally left blank Preface

There are many excellent general introductions to citizenship, but to my mind most have a tendency to suffer from one or more of the following three shortcomings. First, they are written either by academics who employ too much jargon to appeal to the general reader, or by non-academics who ignore or are unaware of the latest research on the topic. Second, they focus on the social, moral, or legal aspects of citizenship at the expense of its political dimension. Third, they offer a somewhat linear view of the history of citizenship as a steady progress from ancient Greece to contemporary notions of cosmopolitan citizenship, passing over the many problems in transferring ideas and assumptions that were indeed largely fashioned in the distant past and applying them today. In this book, I have tried to offer something of a corrective to each of these failings. My aims have been, first, to present some of the latest scholarship on citizenship in an accessible way; second, to highlight the irreducibly political nature of citizenship; and third, to explore some of the challenges confronting the very possibility of citizenship today.

I have been greatly helped in this task by the students at Edinburgh, UEA, Reading, Essex, and UCL who have taken the various courses on democracy and citizenship that I have taught over the past 25 years, and the many PhD students whose research on these issues I have supervised. I am also grateful to various friends, family, and colleagues past and present for the numerous discussions about the meaning and nature of citizenship that have shaped the arguments of this book – particularly Malcolm Anderson, Luca Baccelli, Nigel and Steve Bellamy, Pietro Costa, Bernard Crick, Alan Cromartie, Amy and Louise Dominian, John Greenaway, Richard Gunn, Chris Hilson, Barry Holden, the late Martin Hollis, Cécile Laborde, Andrew Mason, Kate Nash, Aletta Norval, Tim O’Hagan, Sarah Playden, Emilio Santoro, Alan Scott, Jo Shaw, Niamh Nic Shuibhne, John Street, Carl Stychin, Jim Tully, Alex Warleigh-Lack, Albert Weale, Andrew Williams, and Danilo Zolo. A special mention is owed to Dario Castiglione, who hasnotonlydebatedtheseissueswithmeduringthecourseof more than a decade’s collaboration on diverse research projects dealing with EU citizenship, but also kindly agreed to read and comment on an early draft, saving me from several errors in the process. Last but far from least, I am extremely grateful to the staff at Oxford University Press, particularly James Thompson for hassling me to complete the book, Andrea Keegan – the commissioning editor – for her helpful comments on how I might make it more accessible for a general readership, and Deborah Protheroe for helping me locate the pictures. List of illustrations

1 Voting 5 8 Women’s suffrage, New York c Peter Titmuss/Alamy City, 1913, and May Day workers’ rights demonstration, 2 Gated community, New York, 2000 68 Louisiana 21 c Bettmann/Corbis; c 2004 The c 2004 The Image Image Works/TopFoto.co.uk Works/TopFoto.co.uk 9 Citizenship ceremony in 3 Aristotle 30 Australia, 2005 72 c 2006 Alinari/TopFoto.co.uk c Newspix/News Ltd.

4 Machiavelli 37 10 The International Court of c 2006 Alinari/TopFoto.co.uk Justice 86 c AFP/Getty Images 5 The US Constitution and the French Declaration of 11 Martin Luther King 89 Rights 44–5 c AP/TopFoto.co.uk c US National Archives and Records Administration; Musée de la 12 Council of the European Revolution Française, Vizille, Union, Brussels 93 France/The Bridgeman Art Library c Thierry Tronnel/Corbis 6 The People’s Charter, UK, 13 European Constitution 1838 48 referendum, France, c 2003 Fotomas/TopFoto.co.uk 2005 101 c 7 The Putney Debates, 1647 60 Pascal Rossignol/Reuters/Corbis c 2003 Fotomas/TopFoto.co.uk 14 Electoral campaign in the US, 15 Flemish nationalist group 2008 114 Voorpost 119 c Getty Images c AFP/Getty Images

The publisher and the author apologize for any errors or omissions in the above list. If contacted they will be pleased to rectify these at the earliest opportunity. Chapter 1 What is citizenship, and why does it matter?

Interest in citizenship has never been higher. Politicians of all stripes stress its importance, as do church leaders, captains of industry, and every kind of campaigning group – from those supporting global causes, such as tackling world poverty, to others with a largely local focus, such as combating neighbourhood crime. Governments across the world have promoted the teaching of citizenship in schools and universities, and introduced citizenship tests for immigrants seeking to become naturalized citizens. Types of citizenship proliferate continuously, from dual and transnational citizenship, to corporate citizenship and global citizenship. Whatever the problem – be it the decline in voting, increasing numbers of teenage pregnancies, or climate change – someone has canvassed the revitalization of citizenship as part of the solution.

The sheer variety and range of these different uses of citizenship can be somewhat baffling. Historically, citizenship has been linked to the privileges of membership of a particular kind of political community – one in which those who enjoy a certain status are entitled to participate on an equal basis with their fellow citizens in making the collective decisions that regulate social life. In other words, citizenship has gone hand in hand with political participation in some form of democracy – most especially, the

1 Citizenship hlegsi ae ohi eea,adi h specific societies. the in contemporary and confronting general, circumstances in both the – of faces some it noting challenges by precise conclude more and a citizenship, to of on definition move then be terms, to political needs in and by understood important start is shall citizenship I why agenda. book’s at the looking chapter out this lays of and rest scene The the book. sets this of theme central the citizenship provide for consequences their and developments These of way. character the very along the citizenship altering the citizens, define their and of coordinate lives to collective states nation of capacity are the processes testing social two these and ways, globalization different of In impacts multiculturalism. related and twin the by citizenship, produced of so further and a community, witnessing political currently of are transformation we that seen view be the can reflecting citizenship as with concern In today. contemporary citizenship the for part, context large primary centuries the 19th provide early still and that 18th and late the in emerged the that from states tremendously nation differed all city and the Italy, or Renaissance republic of Roman states ancient citizenship, the of to notion different the quite of to were states rise city gave The first changed. which has Greece, citizen ancient a be and to community needed political qualities democratic the the of nature the time, Over a or colleague, a neighbour, a partner, customer. a as friend, such a relationship, parent, social a of being kinds other to also or but monarchies dictatorships, in subjecthood of as types such other affiliation, to political only not political different of is kind Citizenship specific relationship. a its as obscures role potentially distinctive others, and with important dealings their rights all people’s in encompass duties to and comes it that so expand much, to too respects, citizenship some in justified narrow though its Yet, with focus. account political put traditional often this are to citizenship alternatives of as forms forward new various The vote. to right 2 What is citizenship, and why does it matter? 3 Democraticcitizenshipisasrareasitisimportant.Atpresent, only around 120 of the world’s countries,the or total, approximately are 64% electoral of democracies invoters the having meaningful a sense realistic of chance ofgovernment changing for the a incumbent set of politiciansmere more 22 to of their the taste. world’s Indeed, existing a democraciescontinuously have democratic been in this sense formore. a And period though of the 50 number years of or steadily working if democracies slowly has grown since thein Second established World War, democracies voter has turnout experienced ansteady equally decline. slow For but example, turnout in theperiod United 1945 States to in 2005 the has decreased62.8% by of 13.8% eligible from voters the in high 1960 of in to the the UK low turnout of has 49.0% gone in83.6% down 1996, in by and 1950 24.2% to from the the low highboth of of countries 59.4% have in experienced 2001. considerable True, as fluctuations elsewhere, between highs and lows over the past 60 years, depending on Citizenship has traditionally referred to apractices particular involving set specific of public political rights anda duties given with political respect community. to Broadening its meaningencompass to human relations generally detracts fromimportance the of the distinctively political tasksshape citizens and perform sustain to the collective lifedoubt, of the the commonest community. Without and most crucialinvolvement of in these the tasks democratic is process –also primarily by by speaking voting, out, but campaigning infor various office. ways, Whether and citizens standing participate orcan not, do the so fact colours that how they they regardas their abiding other by responsibilities, those such democratically passedpaying laws taxes, they doing disagree military with, service, andmost so effective on. mechanism It for also them provides to the interests promote and their encourage collective their political rulersgood to rather pursue than the their public’s own. Why political citizenship? Citizenship hnti aemnmm u e ob hti oit fany of society a in that doubt few more but need minimum, we bare believe this people than many see, and shall marriage we or labour, As and co-habitation. goods selling on travelling and it buying be roads, – the unavoidable most degree that some interaction to social find of individuals forms various stable the reasonably all and for clear conditions provide from and property others, and by bodies harm our physical preserve to seek minimum, will bare framework a this formulate At to regulations. – necessary army the and implement force and police a bureaucracy, courts, a and as system such legal – institutions political life, various economic with and along social of regulate sort to some framework need political we stable that believe with anarchists all associated but to commonly All relate are citizenship? it that does benefits how and and qualities crucial, other so the vote to able being is Why regimes. world’s oppressive the and of authoritarian 40% of for population, on at getting many, and – guests subjects best mere at worst are they opportunity, where crucial countries this forms those lack that In people others citizen. with the basis of equal mark less distinguishing or the more a on and reasonably rules to fair the according is policy it government that influencing and of matters prospect democracy that accept to democratic seem of countries members most therefore, of systems, shortcomings democratic and real most 97% or was perceived it the Sweden Whatever (in respectively). ‘best’ 94% the 87% 78% UK and the ‘good’ in it while ‘best’, thought the ‘good 87% a and as government’ democracy of regarded system US the in that respondents found of 2000–2 89% of Survey Values World of The approve itself. to democracy continue they countries, their of democratic arrangements the with dissatisfaction increasing expressing The despite Yet, citizens 1976. undeniable. in nevertheless 91.8% is of trend high downward staggering general a and 1958 in 77.4% modest of very low comparatively a experiencing with example, robust, for extremely Sweden, in remained while have be, levels to voting election countries the some felt voters important or contested how 4 1. The crucial mark of citizenship is the right to vote Citizenship en ecnetrit gemnsadpa ha ihadegree a with ahead plan confidence. and of agreements that into example, enter for can commerce, we as means with such stand areas we In where others. know to to regard us our allow that coordinates ways cases in similar interactions and this in say lights, traffic regulation, Political installing do. by to decide any might with others guess what second certainty to impossible is competent it make because to judgements information the lack just interchanges, we complicated where or corners blind as be such will situations, there conscientiously, acts everyone if each Even towards other. good responsibly possessing and all civilly us behaving of and basis judgement the on coordinate simply to drivers had other we was with and there regulations if traffic Imagine or sure. code for highway know no to be impossible all not can if them, hard solve to very make likely we the decisions and any them, of produced consequences that the effect while and conflict, cause may of which chain a of raise some problems concerns, complex moral Most of disagree. range or err the to in likely will are best world the with and power, reasoning limited and of possessing knowledge goodness creatures, the fallible of also advantage are take Humans may others. It people either. some well that acting just people not on is to rely seek simply would cannot it we disorder But the prevent. – than order worse social far preserve potentially to remedy scope a totalitarian of to state necessary police be a would create it because otherwise, only punished way being responsible feared socially they a in acted coercion people on If depend alone. cannot followed being their and cover cannot everything, regulations and Rules extensive. no how framework, matter political any to are supplements neighbourliness, important good certainly as such to citizenship, come to have linked increasingly be that dispositions moral and social The them. provide to going is state now a we with those associate to a similar only properties that with and community elements political these least at require we complexity 6 What is citizenship, and why does it matter? 7 The logic is simple, even ifconsistently the ignore practice citizens often or is prove not: incompetent, ifeventually they politicians lose will office. Moreover, in a workingparties democracy, regularly where alternate in power, a relatedcitizens incentive to exists listen for to each other. Not only will very varied groups of Now any reasonably stable and efficient politicalone framework, presided even over by a ruthlessthese tyrant, benefits. will For provide example, us think some of of theinsecurity increased suffered uncertainty by and many Iraqi citizens asan a effective result political of order the following lack theHussein. of toppling However, of those Saddam possessing no great wealth,influence power, – or the vast majority ofsatisfied people with in just other any words framework. – They willto will not all want be – one including that the applies government –and and as treats equals, everyone no impartially matter howparticular, rich they or will important want they its may provisions be.all to In to provide enjoy a the just freedom basis to for equal pursue terms their with lives everyone as they else, and choosetheir in on having so a far reasonable as amount is of compatiblemaintenance personal with of security an through appropriate the degree ofstability. social And and a political necessary, if not alwaysensuring a the sufficient, laws condition and for policies ofthese a characteristics political is community possess that the countrydemocracy is and a that working citizens electoral participate infrom making anything it else, so. political Apart involvement helpswhat citizens this shape framework should look like.about People are what likely equality, freedom, to and disagree security involvepolicies and to the support best them in giventhe circumstances. potential Democracy for offers citizens to debateterms these and issues to on come roughly to equal someinterests. appreciation It of also each promotes other’s views government that and evolving is concerns responsive and to changing their conditions byan giving incentive politicians to rule in waysinterests that but reflect those and of advance most not citizens. their own Citizenship s fcr,2%mr re ae,ads n sarsl,most result, a As on. so and taxes, green more 25% the cars, reducing of for favour use measures may 20% 30% power, – wind so 30% do energy, to nuclear carbon how lower about disagree to still need but we emissions, agree may a – So, 60% it. say resolves – best majority policy which they about issue, strongly an disagree on may agree broadly people when even Meanwhile, slightly a with allied be people. will of I group time different each road And on on. majority so a and and building, schooling fox on to minority on comes a it views in my when hunting, majority as a far and so minority concerned a are in abortion be want may who I minority So the houses. or more abortion oppose who entirely minority overlap the to with unlikely the is – say, issues hunting, all support on who minority minority the or themselves majority find the will in it group consistently how or too person Note any on. that so unlikely and is schools, or roads on may spending hospitals less improving another, mean on on less more mean spending will – thing other one each with incompatible are prove policies to several likely how that note unlike Now, not democracies. is most issues in political found of of range distribution given the a but across figures, support these fox up support made who have 35% I and hunting. built, houses more want schools, who improved 20% desire who 30% who hospitals, 60% better-funded abortion, want oppose who supporting 30% 60% emissions, trains, carbon more lower want who 60% 30% taxes, roads, lower more to desiring wanting 40% pensions, higher 30% want contains who electorate reciprocity the and suppose equity example, of For degree citizens. a among citizenship promote democratic to best way its this at in 5, comes Chapter in see shall we As losers. the of views and needs reason the have of always respectful winners be the to So to them. likely exclude is could coalition and winning shift future aware any be of will composition they the also that but process, often majority, the electoral in an compromises build making to alliances form to need citizens 8 What is citizenship, and why does it matter? 9 One can imagine circumstances in whichequitable a political person framework could without enjoy being an ais citizen. holidaying If abroad someone in a stablebenefit democratic from state, many she of will the generally advantagesservices of in its much legal the system same and way public most as of its her citizens. civil The liberties laws will upholding rights be to identical, theirs offering against her violent similar assaulttrial or in fraud, the say, and event to that a she fair shall is have involved many in of such the crimes. same Likewise,to obligations she obey as a those citizen laws that and concern willdriving her, have such a as car, paying speed sales limits tax if on shethe many is non-legally goods, prescribed and social so duties on. that Mostassociated have of with become citizenship will also apply. If she believes a socially people may in fact support verymajority few support policies – that they enjoy will outright mainlyalongside be partly in overlapping different but minorities often distincta groups party of wants people. to If build aconstruct working a majority, therefore, coalition it of will minorities have across to issues a and broad policies spectrum and of arrange trade-offs betweenmakes it them. probable That that most peopleprogrammes will of like opposing some parties bits and of dislike the might other prefer bits: the a attitude US towards voter abortionthe of economic most policies Democrats of and most Republicans,the say, and health a policies UK of voter Labour andConservatives. the They EU will policies cast of their the votepreponderance on of the things basis they of like a orweighted dislike, for appropriately what they regard asissues most and important. attitudes Over change, time, party as fortuneswane are and likely with to them wax the and extentany to individual which voter the coincide preferred with policies a of person, majority one or vote’ a means minority. ‘One that eachin person’s preferences an are equitable treated fashion, while therange need of for people’s parties views to within address their a programmespractise forces a citizens degree to of mutual tolerationother’s and interests accommodation and of concerns. each Citizenship emnn eiet fe l,ms eortccountries democratic a most simply all, than After why rather resident. of citizen permanent question a the become begs to still want it should a way she seek a to in poverty But severe elsewhere. by life driven better in are regimes or oppressive origin, or of war countries of their many result when a age as an stateless in are right people in core see a shall is we this As chapters, deported. subsequent the or of entry foul refused fell be she could if authorities and country, to this right in unqualified remain an or have enter not does important. she is citizens, sense unlike of political First, both the – in concerned citizenship be why to highlight ought which she why reasons two are There enjoy? citizens rights additional the she of if any especially need – never onerous may and duty, find jury citizens do many vote, tasks to other able various being with bothered neighbours. be her then by Why respected community, local the a of becoming pillar from valued others, polite towards and solicitous hardworking is a who as her, individual many prevent to they regard need with Nor position them. same of the naturalized much all, in After be citizen. might a citizens of result status direct the the possessing not not local are of the disadvantages in of fluent sorts not these are But they language. if especially in – citizens rights many their to exercising compared can disadvantage factors a contingent at of non-citizens number put a practice in course, social Of certain benefits. enjoy by even protected possibly while, be and a and legislation for tax employment on income stay pay and probably job will a she find then to the decides likes she she much If so co-citizens. country their towards to do civilly they as as act visitors should are they country considerations, host such her by of motivated citizens the them. extent framing the in to role Likewise, no had foreign has a she of though laws even the country, following of behind value lie the will recognizing considerations her norms similar these Indeed, by home. abide at to as reason abroad much trade as fair has only she buy then and goods, remarks, sexist the and across racist ladies avoid old road, help litter, up pick should person responsible 10 What is citizenship, and why does it matter? 11 As I noted above, increasing numbersparticipating. of They citizens either do feel not it bother isto pointless free-ride to on do the so efforts or of arebe others. happy that, They as are presently mistaken. organized, It democracy mayexpectations falls well citizens far have short of of it, the sohas that little they or feel no their effect. involvement Yet thatabandoning view democracy is as not for so seeking much to ancompare improve argument life it. for One under need any only established democracy, imperfectthey though all are, with that underbe any aware existing that undemocratic democracy regime makes to amajority difference from of citizens which draw the tangible benefits. Peopleself-respect, lack and possibly respect for otherswhich too, they in do a not regime have under theand possibility being of counted, expressing no their matter views howrun. benevolently Rulers and need efficiently it no is longer seegive the an ruled opinion as and equals, have as their entitledtermsaseveryoneelse.Andsotheyneednottaketheminto interests to considered on the same account. Democratic citizenship changes the wayexercised power and is the attitudes of citizens to each other. Because acknowledge a humanitarian duty to helphave those established in international dire agreements need on and asylumprevent seekers to individuals being turned away orwhere returned their to life countries would be ininternationally danger. Increasingly, recognized there rights are for also long-term residents,‘denizens’ or as they have come to beentered called. the If country she and has is lawfully ano law-abiding prospects individual, of so her there being are deported,under then its why well-ordered not regime? just The enjoy second living For reason the comes qualities in she here. likes about thisfrom country its democratic stem character. in Even large the part quasi-citizenshipshe status has come to possess underinternational international agreements law that is are the promoted product and of by reliably democratic kept states. only And their being democracieson depends at in least turn a significant proportiondoing of their citizens duty within and such participating states in the democratic process. Citizenship nenlgonsfrecuinhv endopda baseless, as dropped these been of Many have address. exclusion fixed for a grounds have internal by not – does does who as anyone vote, – to default right their lose often were prisoners workers while many excluded, which before suffrage, achievement male the universal after of long vote established the most obtained in women So, democracies ill. mentally or or homeless, crime jobless, a committed become or having property through of disqualified lack as a or to education; due unqualified as or gender, or racial, grounds; on other inferiors natural as designated those have included exclusions well Internal community. as political within the from outside excluded as been have many a past, is the who In concerns citizen. belonging, or membership component, first The equality. civic of condition in a combine establish which to of ways all different – processes social and economic, community’s political, the in participation and membership, with rights associated and benefits collective the a community, of political membership democratic – of analysis components this linked from Three emerge equals. in citizenship as and far, people how treats determining it in ways, role what important an plays or it participation of their particular, lack In it. make ways people many what in reflects community that of political character given the a And of community. life the take collective who the those about – decisions club key exclusive an of politics. membership democratic involves to It link intrinsic an has therefore, Citizenship, definition a towards citizenship: of components The on heard them citizens. have to to basis entitled equal not an is She but subject. views, tolerated her a express just may the is contrast, example By my respect. of and resident concern permanent equal of fellow basis our a with on collaborate citizens and ourselves political control our to control and ways to leaders the both in us ruled allows being citizenship in above, and indicated ruling in share a us gives democracy 12 What is citizenship, and why does it matter? 13 The second component, rights, has oftendefining been criterion seen of as citizenship. the Contemporary political philosophers have adopted two main approaches to identifying As we shall see in laterstraightforward. chapters, Citizenship none implies of the these capacity criteria to proves both participate the in political and the socio-economicYet, life the of nature the of community. that participation andhave the varied capabilities over it time calls and for remainalso matters of be debate. willing Citizens to must see themselvesparticular as state in in some which sense they belonging reside. torecognize At the it the as very a least, centre they of must behaviour, power demand entitled taxes, to and regulate so their on, inwith return various for public providing goods. them How fartheir they fellow must citizens also is identify a with differentcertainly matter. A requires working some democracy elements of anotably, common broad civic acceptance culture: of the legitimacy ofof the politics prevailing and rules probably a commonpolitical language debate. or A languages degree for of trustalso and proves solidarity important among if citizens all arecollective to benefits collaborate of in citizenship, producing rather the thanfree-ride some on attempting the to efforts of others.qualities The depend extent on to citizens which possessing such acontested, shared yet identity crucial, is issue a as more societiesmulticultural. become increasingly though others remain live issues, asof does the the right unequal to effectiveness vote amongattention different has groups. concentrated However, much on recent the externalseekers exclusions and of immigrants. asylum Here, too, there havetowards been more changes inclusive policies at bothinternational the levels, domestic though and significant exclusionary measures persist or have recently been introduced.levels Yet, the of current international high migration, though notbeen unprecedented, sufficiently have intense and prolonged andas of to such have global forced scope a major rethink of the criteria for citizenship. Citizenship ruet aetoeeet.Frt hyapa ocertain to appeal they First, these elements. of two the Most have to rights. arguments but those such have as people rights why to for appeal arguments the not any is in rights work of the account does What highlight. with to link serves the citizenship that dimension collective important they an individuals, have to attach rights they though way However, the treated. in are decency of standards certain including to others, governments, against make they can – individuals entitlements claims individual are as rights see too to respects tend various We in reductive. is that consideration note primary also the we rights once making though, acute, less seems paradox That of decisions themselves. the citizens to seen, subject be as to perhaps, have paradoxically citizenship somewhat of result rights a the As superior. disagreements, respects, these some of post in the even, past or first sufficient plurality as the system view others vote, to citizen’s right a equal guarantee to necessary as of representation system proportional given a advocate might too. people system some security a Similarly, social see and to wish service to health likely supported more publicly is democrat economic social and a social whereas their rights, to regard of with equality individuals respect show and to concern sufficient as market free to the likely regard are neo-liberals So politics. of mainstay democratic the contemporary form that divisions other various and the ideological reflect largely differences These approach generate. very either might to rights come precise the they democracy, about of conclusions idea different rights very citizens’ the of in accounts implicit these being of as other or one of legitimacy accept the broadly democrats committed most prove if approaches Even Both problematic. terms. equal and democratic free in on participate decision-making to are citizens that if rights necessary the are identify to simply modestly, second more A tries, free respect. approach as and other concern each equal treat of to worthy are individuals they that if rights acknowledge those to identify ought to citizens seeks approach first A rights. these 14 What is citizenship, and why does it matter? 15 The third component, participation, comes incitizenship here. the Calling ‘right to have rights’numerous indicates rights how depends access on to membership ofcommunity. a However, political many human rights activists havethe criticized exclusive character of citizenship formaintaining this that very rights reason, ought to bebasis available regardless to of all where on you an are equal result, born they or have happen sometimes to argued live. against As any a limits on access to goods as being important for humana beings life to that be reflects able their to own lead absence free of choices coercion and by effort others – and usuallyfor certain the agency, material such preconditions as food, shelter, andimportantly health. from Second, our and point most of view, theyrelations imply should that be social so organized thatequal we basis secure for these all. rights Rights on are an senses, collective therefore. goods On in the two one important hand,an they interest assume in that certain we goods all as share shape important our for own us lives. to On be the ableprovided other to by hand, people these accepting rights certain can civic onlyare duties be respected, that including ensure cooperating they to setcollective up arrangements. appropriate For example, if weas take personal an security uncontentious shared human good,can then only a be right protected to if this all good with refrain others from and illegitimate collaborate interference to establishforce a that legal upholds system that and right police inequals. a In fair other manner words, that we treats return allthe to as priority the of arguments political establishing citizenship canvasseddepend earlier. For on rights the existence of somewhich form citizens of seek political fair community terms in ofnecessary association for to them secure to those pursue goods theirothers. lives Hence, on the equal association terms of with rightsdemocratic with citizens, the with rights citizenship of itself formingrights the because right it of is the ‘rightinstitutionalize to the have rights rights’ of – citizens the in capacityegalitarian an to way. appropriately Citizenship opru u niiullvso artrswt tes fw put we If others. with terms rights fair enjoy on we lives that individual life our collective pursue its to of framing on the participating in and terms community equal political a of through member is a It being together. go participation and rights, membership, So adopted their in citizenship of countries. duties the to commit to willing workers migrant for and procedures naturalization equitable have non-discriminatory to and seekers asylum to give succour to hinder states, than non-democratic rather in aid processes on to democratization obligation states an democratic creates existing that of right part human the a as the rights’ recognizing have out to rules the ‘right above and the police of on none or Finally, culture forces. on armed spending more provision or public goods, generous these less of and taxes lower have to schemes, others security say, social and and education, taxes health, high public have generous to for choose provide might will countries they Some rights how. which and decide citizens’ to in ability placing the in hands rights’ own have to ‘right respect, the this forms In community. citizenship political their of to goods contributions collective their the and themselves citizens the of from activities result positive also rights second, For, countries. in differentials between significant wealth for allow these still Rectifying would rulers. though, authoritarian abuses, their to arms selling abuses, as rights such human related often various poorer, and of states exploitation non-democratic, direct or indirect have the countries from these benefited of argued many be that could justification it some course, with entitled Of are grounds. we humanitarian that on rights simply is, to that – rights would human people as most characterize what range beyond and extend level that a entitlements enjoy of democracies well-run of citizens the First, respects. main three in criticisms, deficient these are in they justice much is or there membership Though either participation. on depend not and any community of political boundaries the transcend should Rights citizenship. 16 What is citizenship, and why does it matter? 17 Citizenship is a condition of civic equality. Itof consists a of political membership community where all citizensof can social determine cooperation the on terms an equal basis.equal This rights status to not the only enjoyment secures of thepolitical collective association goods but provided also by involves the equal dutiessustain to them promote – and including the good of democratic citizenship itself. This dilemma proves particularly acute ifthe the qualities good associated in with question what has is technically known as a ‘public Earlier I suggested that citizenship involvesencapsulated a in paradox viewing it as theparadox ‘right consists to in have our rights’. That rights asexercising citizens our being basic dependent citizenship on right our tocooperation political with participation our in fellow citizens. For ourcollective rights policies derive we from decide the upon tosuch resolve as common providing problems, for personal securitylegal with system. a Moreover, police once force in and place, theseoperate policies if will we only continue to cooperatepaying to taxes maintain and them respecting through the rightsthem. of So others rights that involve follow duties from –political not rights least to the participate duty to on exercise whichThis all the paradox our gives other rise rights in depend. itsmuch turn cooperative to behaviour. a Namely, dilemma that that we can willshirk affect be our tempted civic to duties if weand feel the we rights can they enjoy provide the by collectiverather relying goods than on exerting others ourselves. to And do the theirway, more bit the citizens less act they in will this trust theirthem. fellow Collective citizens arrangements to will collaborate seem with increasinglyprompting unreliable, people to abandon citizenship forindividualistic, other, more ways of securing their interests. The paradox and dilemma of citizenship these three components together, we come updefinition with of the citizenship: following Citizenship ieiecnendol ihteronitrss American interests. own are their politicians with and only citizens concerned fellow likewise their that provide. felt to also exist have authorities They political goods but collective participation the political to to also just not attitudes their and in self-interested calculating more becoming civic-mindedness citizens such with that lessened, is has voting, in decline fear, the growing by The symbolized others. with of along opportunity views the their valued expressing have in to instrumental appear narrowly They so reasoning. past, not their the were In simply so. citizens doing their that free-rider do seems the to it in fail point others little if be all, will After there others. part, of efforts free-rider the the on pays rely still to it individual, an As this reasoning. on self-centred effect that little fear have the should Even collapse effort. may the democracy worth seems the hardly to it difference result, a small election make very will the vote Given person’s irrational. one seemed any it likelihood – all citizens at why vote puzzled to be bothered to used scientists political fact, In great. is free-ride to As temptation term. the long result, are often a which countries, virtues, democratized its newly than in evident and more diffuse, be to tend politicians – and dislike policies people the – democracy of And shortcomings institutions. the democratic sustaining vote to individual little any very while contributes not, a or in vote living you from whether gain democracy will You are voting. as not individualized, of and disadvantages tangible the less individual, far each are by benefits directly the felt while and immediate is and vote informed your becoming casting of the cost confronts likewise The so free-riding. and of kind quandary this operates of democracy good not respects, public choose many a I In as if costs. even the it with from them benefiting help they me to light, stop street to a able for be pay not if house will my So, of others. side of efforts either the neighbours on the ‘free-ride’ temptation to a individuals cases, for such exist In will not. or they it whether supporting of to nobody regardless contributed which benefits, from the lighting, from street excluded as be such can good, a is that – good’ 18 What is citizenship, and why does it matter? 19 This change in people’s attitudes and perceptionschallenge presents to a the major practice and purposecollective of goods citizenship. that Most citizens of the collaborate totheir support rights and depend on are which subject todescribed the above. public Like goods voting, dilemma the costthe of police, the roads, tax schools, I and pay hospitals todirect will support and seem personal somehow than more the benefitsand I a derive mere from drop these in goods, thepay ocean for compared them. to Like the democracy, billions these needed goodsto to also all tend citizens to regardless be of available howthey much have they paid pay at or, indeed, all. whether True, thesequality goods of do public not goods have – the some precise However, degree it of would exclusion be is both possible. inefficient andinjustices potentially to create do great so. Moreover, in numerousbenefit indirect from ways a we good all transport do system,population, a and healthy from and others well-educated as wellsecurity. as That ourselves said, enjoying people personal will always bewonder naturally whether inclined they to are getting valuecontributing for more money than or their are fair share. Suchbe concerns particularly are acute likely if to people feeleach little other sense or of believe solidarity others with toit be comes untrustworthy, especially to when the sort ofmost redistributive social measures rights. needed Consequently, to the support inducements toindependent, adopt non-cooperative behaviour for more apparently secure, short-term advantages will be great – even if, as will often national election studies, for example, revealyears that the over majority the of past US 40 citizensgovernment have benefits come a to few feel that major interestseveryone, rather than although those the of percentage has fluctuated24% between and lows 19% of in 1974 and 1994all, respectively to believing highs of it 39% benefited andBritish 40% opinion in poll 1984 of and 1996 2004. revealed Likewise,respondents that a believed a Members staggering of 88% Parliament of served interests other than their constituents’ or thecontending country’s they – with simply 56% served their own agenda. Citizenship otatratal festesriecnend nti way, this In concerned. private service a the or offers public actually a contractor of whether levels of and regardless standards met, given are that provision guarantee of to provider is a aim as The necessarily services. than rather the regulator stressed a have as they role doing, state’s so citizens In guarantee customers. to as trying rights by certain and service public to given contract a the supply for compete by to problem periodically this companies overcome getting them to paid tried have have who Governments those it. to for good they a if of enjoyment products better restrict or cannot prices lower compete offering to by reason customers no for have Companies market operate. standard not that do is incentives goods’ ‘public of people benefits exclude the to from being unjust it morally of or consequence impossible One technically substance. either in always services, not these if of form some in marketized partly have main they four First, in ways. development this to responded have Governments on. so workforce, and healthy crime, and more well-educated costly less of a number – a problems wake social its in brings provision the public while depleted efficient, less proves of schemes proliferation insurance a private because different of risen cost has the policing that and been health, often education, has result public net for the taxation But in schemes. less pay to sought gated and their neighbourhoods, police to firms insurance, security health private private employed out their taken send schools, to private opted to have children people So, process. the public in from provision detracting often security, to personal health even and and education pensions from areas, more ever private in into arrangements contract to developed citizens within wealthier trend for the democracies in apparent been has tendency This individuals. defecting the of most for community even the but for whole just a not as beneficial of less effect or long-term costly perverse more the proving have decisions such case, the be 20 2. The rich have increasingly withdrawn from the collective provision of public goods Citizenship nei oe mlyi efihyadiety ii oiaiyhas solidarity Civic ineptly. and selfishly it and employ vote power their in for once anything do will politicians felt have increasingly Citizens grown. has politics about disillusion Meanwhile, many states. in democratic occurred advanced a has and services from, public withdrawal of, partial attenuation a resulting – education or care health easy, as comparatively such is arrangements private economic, as into moral defection much and as the are where provision those public for particularly imperatives – it goods how other and For be obtained. should be service might good a what for clear, criteria reasonably technical are there gas, where like and utilities telephones, public and former electricity, the fully of most some be as can such that marketized, services have those they for large, successful and most By been results. mixed had have policies These courts. the and banks independent as such immune self-interest, bodies from impartial supposedly to alike markets economic political the and of regulation by the interest and public standard-setting the depoliticizing support to power state using cynicism about overcome to attempted have and they branding Finally, through advertising. them woo to citizens’ attempted to and as preferences research consumer conducted electoral have of They practice politics. very the to an approach adopted marketized have increasingly they their Third, retain arrangements. so collective and to weight allegiance their pulling the are to all contributors that net system reassure such to By tried service. have community they of measures, retraining, forms in various engage do work, to seek possibly to and actively and benefits for security available social be of to a recipients example, obliged For have support. states state of of number recipients net are especially who – those citizens of of responsibilities the stressing complemented by has strategy response this service second the Their buying account. were own they their if on case their the meeting be and would money as for requirements value getting attention to much paid as be that will citizens reassure to tried have governments 22 What is citizenship, and why does it matter? 23 Globalization has been widely perceived asboth further these promoting sources of political disaffection.goods, That from many security public against crime tobe monetary obtained stability, can through only international mechanisms hasdisaffection added and to the civic belief in themeasures. shortcomings International of organizations political are inevitably muchdistant more from the citizens they serve.harder Size to matters, feel and solidarity it with is very much with large whom and one highly has diverse few, groups if any,and shared hardly cultural any or direct other interaction. references Asindividualized a behaviour result, is short-term much more likely. Puton simply, strangers cheating is easier than with peoplecontinue you to meet interact every with day into and thecomplex will foreseeable and future. globalized The societies more are, thestrangers more to we each all other. become It also becomes much harder to influence decreased accordingly as inequalities have growngroups. between While social the better educated andsociety wealthier have sections pushed of governments and politiciansless, to the do poorer less sections, and who find ithave harder increasingly to withdrawn organize from in politics any altogether. The case, problem seems to be two-fold. Onadopted the a one more hand, consumer-orientated citizens and have criticaldemocratic view politics. of They have taken aassuming more that self-interested others, stance, their fellow citizens, politicians,the and public those sector in more generally, do sopoliticians too. have On likewise the treated other citizens hand, moreboth like marketized consumers the and public sector wherethemselves possible rather and like acted the heads ofdiffer rival as firms. to Commentators which came first,developments but most have fuelled accept each these other, two producing increasing disillusionment with democratic politics. Instead ofas being a viewed means of bringing citizensinterests together from in which pursuit they of collectively those benefit, public be politics seen has as come but to an inefficienttheir mechanism private for interests. individuals to pursue Citizenship mirto n rwn utcluaimaeas feared also are multiculturalism Increased alone’. growing ‘bowl and more immigration and more but teams pin in ten bowling go longer no Americans Robert that in observation up Putnam’s of summed habit others, the with – joining capital’ and ‘social collaborating of collapse produced the has with voting concern and a attitudes civic in Zealand. decline New a and about Australia, Worries Canada, States, United the as Europe, such outside those most including in states, happened democratic has established what mirror EU the in Developments and other. equitable, the effective, on efficient, regulator, an economic as depoliticized and side, one the as on such rights, values, ‘European’ supposed to appeals notably non-political means, through itself has legitimize EU to the Meanwhile, sought funding. increasingly for EU and the members on any reliant if invariably few with groups, are lobby organizations Brussels-based society small, civil trans-European of while majority Parliament, vast European the the within parties voting national as of largely blocks exist or parties country political their European to group. not economic or beneficial either as narrowly terms in self-interested EU the view increasingly, allegiances and subnational mainly, or and national citizens their large, to and tied By remained decline. have the the on of likewise elections and national states for member that below far while is known, turnout scarcely electoral and trusted little both European are parliament, politicians a and elections having Despite responses well. and dilemmas these reflects organization, developed international most world’s the (EU), Union European The solutions. political collective than more as impartial seen and be competent to come forms have weak regulation and depoliticized markets of Again, power. with those sufficient influence of to are size that in concerns others and with interests combine one’s to sharing difficult groups more rather is millions it in and one thousands, is than vote Your account. to politicians hold or 24 What is citizenship, and why does it matter? 25 Both social and economic changes andthem the are political challenging responses the to very possibilityThis of book citizenship, explores therefore. these challenges further. Weby start sketching in the Chapter historical 2 development ofcity citizenship states from of the ancient Greece tocentury. the In nation many states respects, of this the history 20th providescurrent the thinking resources about for citizenship. Chapters 3, 4, and 5 then Yet, it is dubious that such attemptscommunities will and be rights effective. alike Political are constructedactivities and of sustained citizens. by People the feel bound tolaw only each if other they and regard by themselves the relationships as with involved each in other shaping and their theinfluence state the through rules, their policies, ability and to politiciansIndeed, that they govern have social good life. grounds forequals believing without they that are capacity. not So civic appeals torights political will community not or of themselves createthe citizenship products because of they citizenly are action throughPeople political will participation. not feel any sense ofcomponents ownership of over citizenship them. stand The and three fall together. to have reduced community feeling basedAs on a a common result, culture. governments have soughtnational to and inculcate civic a belonging sense through of ancitizenship enhanced education emphasis in on schools and fornaturalize. immigrants This seeking teaching to has usually emphasizedbroadly national conceived culture rather than political culturedemocratic in sense. the Likewise, narrower, they have increasinglyhave claimed depoliticized to important decisions – handinginterest the rates setting over of to national banks,constitutional emphasizing courts deference in to matters of protectingindependent rights, regulators and to using oversee not onlyutilities, the such former as public gas and water, buteconomic also areas, many such other as social sentencing and policy. Inhave these tried ways, to they separate membership and rights from participation. Citizenship lehligte together. them holding indispensable glue a the as offering elements participation three political these with see package, to need the stress today. I citizenship Throughout of the feasibility changing the are perhaps that and ways character in transformed being is noting each turn, how in participation and rights, membership, examine 26 Chapter 2 Theories of citizenship and their history

Theories of citizenship fall into two types: normative theories that attempt to set out the rights and duties a citizen ideally ought to have, and empirical theories that seek to describe and explain how citizens came to possess those rights and duties that they actually have. In different but related ways, both types of theory appeal to history.

Normative theories look to history to explore the ideal of the good citizen. Past accounts of citizenship have inevitably shaped how we think about what it is to be a citizen. They provide a sort of scrapbook of ideas about the attributes and advantages of citizenship: who is a citizen, the kind of contribution the state and other citizens can expect of him or her and under which circumstances, and what he or she can expect of them and when. Accordingly, contemporary normative theories of citizenship tend to elaborate upon and test themselves against older views. They point out the logical inconsistencies of past theories, drop certain elements on the grounds of their outdatedness or undesirability, and embellish or add others as more appropriate to present conditions in order to come up with what they believe is the best possible account of citizenship today. For example, military service was an integral part of older views of citizenship, but has gradually been dropped in more recent accounts. But some of the reasons that made a willingness to die for one’s country an important part

27 Citizenship eeomn fdmcai iiesi ihntento ttsof states nation the within citizenship democratic the of concern development to These turn theories. then empirical shall influential I most topic. the the on thinking later accounts ‘classic’ much two orientating these in with rooted Rome, much and very Greece are ancient citizenship of ‘models’ shall dominant we the As see, variants. modern their and their elaboration, theories, subsequent normative important by historically start two shall at I looking debates. that contemporary in theories those prominently on most concentrate feature either to of going theories am of range I Instead, full type. the to justice do cannot chapter This their within societies. different defined or very practised own for is militate citizenship to way – the today to some changes including – many activists inspired and also thinkers have later ideals same organized. these were of societies elaborations these But these way and the ours for to justification citizenship a of provided ideal the had of Rome views and different Greece very ancient who in actors people political So, and citizenship. social create various the of the actions shaping and and demands legitimizing by citizenship of theory any within explanatory role independent an play normative themselves Indeed, theories up. opened or normative foreclosed certain were ways possibilities the identifying on focus normative and particular ideal a by motivated invariably or Implicitly are explanatory. they purely explicitly, as accounts be these would regard it However, to did. wrong it forms the given took in and arose circumstances citizenship why seek and theories how These understand people. to of groups status different this to ways granted the been and has places, and times different of in emergence citizenship the fashioned have and that economic, processes social, political the explore theories empirical contrast, By in see shall we as 3. accounts, Chapter later many in citizenship of desirable qualities strong as a figure and still patriotism co-nationals, one’s as with such identification citizen, good the of theories past of 28 Theories of citizenship and their history , the Greek model . BC BC 29 In an important essay, the historian ofobserved ideas how J. the G. Greek A. and Pocock Romancitizenship characterizations offer of the classical models notto only the because ‘classical’ they period belong of historymuch but later also debate in on setting the the subject. termscitizenship The of is so-called drawn Greek principally model from of thewhat writings we of know Aristotle of and the politicalextent, system Sparta in in Athens the and, 5th to a and lesser 4th centuries Two models of citizenship Western Europe. Yet these theories have oftenpurpose had of a their normative own: namely, to seethat the arose democratic, after welfare the states Second World Warsyntheses as of partial various realizations aspects and of themodels two of dominant citizenship. normative The key debate,of explored the in book, much is of whether the rest thesespurs normative to models further remain developing relevant the as scopeor and reflect substance unattainable of and citizenship possibly undesirablewe aspirations would that do well to renounce. The key feature of this viewmakers was of the the equality law. of Along citizens with as theanalysts rulers writings of or of the defenders Roman and republic of c. 510–27 Clearly, to construct a history of thethese idea two of models citizenship is around overly schematic.that However, it later remains thinkers true frequently refer back to them, be it to bemoan and its Roman republican variants havecitizenship inspired that those stress theories political of participation aselement. its By defining contrast, Pocock identifies what hemodel calls of the citizenship Roman with imperial Rome.view The of key citizenship feature was of equality this underextended the to law. As all such, subjects it of could the be inspires Roman those Empire. later This theories account of citizenshipstatus that as see its equality main of element. legal Citizenship .Aitte h hoito h re oe fcitizenship of model Greek the of theorist the Aristotle, 3. itrorpy–o h rcn fhwcranpol aethought have people certain how of tracing in the exercise or justifiable – a historiography is it history, So, as them. dubious between if tensions even the other overcome or possibly one and on them elaborate of to attempt an as be characterized can roughly citizenship about theorizing and much thinking particular, In contemporary afresh. and begin them to denounce need to the or advocate them, update and refine passing, their 30 Theories of citizenship and their history The, Politics . Aristotle regarded BC 31 polites, or citizens. Though neither the qualifications Aristotle As I noted, the Greek modelAristotle, is particularly largely his inspired account by of the citizenship writings in of Citizenship as equal participation: ancient Greece and the Roman republic about the past – to lookpolitical at thought the through citizenship the tradition lens in of Western these two views. written some time between 335 and 323 To be a citizen it was necessaryknown to genealogy be as a being male born aged to 20be an or a Athenian over, patriarch citizen of of family, to a household,ability a to warrior fight – – possessing and the a armsslaves. master and So of gender, the race, labour and of class others, definedshall notably citizenship, see and in as the we next chapter, manydebates of turn the on main how contemporary far theynumbers continue were to excluded: do women so. (though As married awomen Athenian result, were large citizens for genealogical purposes);immigrants, children; or ‘metics’ – including thosesettled whose in families Athens had for been several generationslegally (although free, they liable were to taxation, andall, had slaves. military It duties); is and reckoned above thatfluctuated the number between of 30,000 citizens and in 50,000, Athens whileslaves the was number of of the order of 80,000 to 100,000. Therefore, deemed appropriate for membership of thisduties select he group expected nor of the them arethey regarded have as cast entirely a suitable long today, shadowtheir over fundamental the rationale history still of underlies citizenship much and thinking. contemporary human beings as ‘political animals’ becauselive it in is political in communities our – nature indeed, to polis, he or contended, city only state, within could a humanHowever, potential people be played fully the realized. roles appropriate tobelieved what was Aristotle their natural station inas life, with only some qualifying Citizenship te en hspwrwssvrl icmcie.Ctzn were Citizens circumscribed. severely was each power on this bodies different meant the other by operated of checks terms the short and office the equal although an power, have political would exercising these all of of that chance aim likelihood The the years. increase two to of was maximum devices a and or lot one by for chosen held were usually long offices as public for successful, terms were multiple they serve as could and were Assembly who the generals, by of exception elected the With period. public some holding at office also avoid not could citizens many Meanwhile, packing. jury and income its regular both a discourage becoming to from themselves lot presented by who chosen those were among jurors However, paid. least at jury was assemblies, service the in involvement Unlike decrees. and affairs own their or government, local 140 of some units were territorial there addition, and order, In public taxation. alliances, and of finance forming and the war peace, of of declarations concluding – the the Assembly All the 501. before over came occasions issues some major on and more, juries or that 201 given numbered responsibility frequent jury a doing again, 30, – over service for aged citizens citizens 6,000 for of and, quorum sessions, a plenary required and year a least times at 40 met which Assembly, the a in at participating meant minimum this in Athens sharing In of office’. right judicial ‘the and level deliberative some at involve he to state, city it same considered the within citizen between of even categories and different polities between differed that entailed acknowledged this he what Though of turn’. life in civic ruled the being in and share ruling who ‘all citizens as described Aristotle slaves. and majority women the particularly by population, after the looked of being needs everyday duties their citizenly on inconsiderable rested not their For perform citizens. to of capacity expectations their high the given one. inevitable substantial was a this Yet, though minority, a by enjoyed was citizenship rasml onsfrpbi icsino local of discussion public for points assembly or agorae, 32 n hs constructed these and demes, Theories of citizenship and their history 33 to sit in the Council of 500 for a year. They all served for a Aristotle acknowledged that such forms ofto citizenship be were possible likely only in fairlyjust small so states. everyone That could was have important a not of turn government at sufficiently ruling simple and as to to keepprofessional be the bureaucracy manageable tasks or without political a class, but also because it was Athens was unusual among Greek citydemocratic. states Indeed, in Aristotle, being who so periodically residedbut in was Athens not born there andpersonal so preference not for an systems Athenian that citizen, mixed expressedaristocratic democracy a and with monarchical elements. However, even insystems those that did so, citizenship remainedexample, fairly like onerous. his For mentor Plato, Aristotlemooted, had admiration a for certain, the if much more moreSparta. austere By citizenship contrast code to of Athens, wherecultivation the of arts, leisure philosophy, and were the much admired,military Sparta service emphasized above all else. Childrenfamilies were aged separated 7 from and their subjected towere a attached rigorous to training, a and ‘mess’. thereafter Given thatAssembly, they Spartan still citizens had became to even attend more the permanentservants public than their Athenian counterparts. Intheir fact, limited it opportunities was to precisely develop privatein interests particular that so Plato admired. organized into 10 ‘tribes’ based on50 residence, councillors with chosen each by selecting lot fromdemes among candidates elected by the tenth of their term on thelegislation, Committee and of for 50, one which day proposed asDay-to-day the administration president was of in the the Committee. hands of‘magistrates’, chosen some annually 1,200 by lot from thoseoffice, who with stood the for period of serviceall restricted public to offices two were terms. paid, Although selectionmeant by there lottery could and be short no terms careerone politicians. adds Yet, citizenship military itself, service if and participationfairly in full local occupation. affairs, was a Citizenship hc iieshv qa oiia oesads utteteach treat must so and powers in equality, political political equal of have condition citizens true which a of epitome the as later thinkers many to appeared has citizenship Greek Unsurprisingly, ( Greek us the giving from thereby ‘democracy’, rule, word did the citizens as sense qualified real who very people a those in Nonetheless, treason. of on charges execution trumped-up their even or of ostracism removal through physical opponents the with ending personal, often and were bitter there Disagreements factions. between and tensions classes persistent different were reality, There the Athens. from in far least often at also was is concord It of wealthy. ideal and Aristotle’s born that high true the by Council dominated and be Assembly to the tended that know we over course, control Of popular government. of degree a considerable of a privilege provided the it was minority, citizenship model Greek the in Though ‘the to also but himself’ to must ‘just citizen belong a not sum, In threats. military courageous especially being danger, and before advantage, private put above they good so public patriotism, the by motivated being judgement, capacity prudent a for having by extremes, temperate avoiding being and justice, self-control of exercising sense a possessing citizens on agreement rested so, Even unanimously. policies rights, collective disputed adopt resolve and select harmoniously and them, offices for given people for right best the are be qualities to which likely on they agree are to then able Only interests. share common other, have each and know values, must Citizens together community. living knit from tightly only a proceed in to likely was that citizens among such that or surmised concord, if Aristotle – debate. consensus extended by following settled be, were need issues most ideal, that the likely was appears unanimity it disagreements, and settle to idea vote the a invented taking probably of Athenians likely the were Although virtues fostered. civic be requisite to the that settings smaller in only ue(kratos). rule demos) eeddo omo ii friendship civic of form a on depended homonoia, 34 demokratia polis’. ,orpeople Theories of citizenship and their history 35 Both republican and imperial Rome offerin important these contrasts respects. The Roman republicansometimes model collapsed of into citizenship the is Greek model.some But similarities, while there there are are also strikingclasses differences. existed Though in Greek society, including amongqualified those as who citizens, the ideal ofwith citizenship the became aspiration classless to ‘concord’, a productother of private putting interests class to and one side.republic By was contrast, born the of Roman class discordplebeians and to the obtain struggle rights of against the the patricians. The key event in other with equal concern and respect.towards They delegating have political viewed tasks the to trend apoliticians professional and class public of administrators with foreboding,presaging as a loss of political freedomthe and – equality, and in lamented their opinion –citizens short-sighted to tendency desert for public ever service more tocontrast, pursue critics personal of concerns. this By model of citizenshipmuch argue an that ideal it as was hopelessly not idealized. so oppressive. In On reality, it the was one doubly hand, itwomen, rested and on other the non-citizens. oppression On of the slaves, oppressive other of hand, citizens it in was demanding theyinterests sacrifice to their the private service of theoppression state. were As linked: we citizens saw, the could two only formspublic dedicate of life themselves because to their private liveshave were also serviced been by the others. mark Both ofhave totalitarian typically regimes. treated The non-citizens latter as too lesshave than demanded fully not human just and allegiance butof also citizens the with total the identification state, regardingself-interest all rather dissent than as an indicative alternative of pointconcern. of As view well or as valid being repressive,highly such inefficient systems – tend not to least be in divertingprivate sphere all of talent the away from economy the onrests. which Contrary the wealth to of what a was society intended,the making main the avenue public of sphere personal advancementand can the lead abuse to of corruption public power for private again. Citizenship eulcn uha ieocaatrzdcvcvru nsimilar in virtue civic characterized Roman Cicero Although as good. such public republicans the to service Greek disinterested the of than ideal character instrumental more and much politics a gave citizenship conflict class ongoing this appreciated, republican theorists neo-Roman later other drawing and and, Machiavelli republic them, Roman on the of the historians among the factions As different patricians. for support depending as waning importance and their waxing on plebeians the of tension, influence in the always with were people and popular Senate the reality, within In people assemblies. the and Senate the between a partnership suggested SPQR) to abbreviated frequently People’, Roman slogan executive. The the formed higher who the Consuls among the especially particularly – magistracy, patricians the by dominated was it hseryhsoywste‘eeso’o h lbin othe to 494 plebeians in the Hill of Aventine ‘secession’ the was history early this hl nr oteSnt esdt eedo akaround rank on depend to 400 ceased Senate the to Senate. entry the While with rested power True of counterparts. influence Athenian political their the like anything as possessed well never Roman as citizens magistrates, bodies, and these Tribunes all become on to sit eligible and being for vote to able being Despite powers. legislative judicial than exercised rather these However, a divisions. and tribal centuries, on or based units, third legionary their by on elected based one soldiers groupings, serving clan family on based assemblies one elected existed: popularly other Three ultimately classes. but all people, encompassed common the to these Initially, only (plebiscita). applied laws laws pass to most power and the courts, had permanent importantly of creation this the though with litigation, fell civil function with other. dealt each also including Council magistrates, Plebeian other The of acts the the possessed who veto Council, to Plebeian power of Tribunes new of a creation by the elected to People, led the that look move would a who interests, officials their appoint after to patricians the get to support BC en opsdisedo oual lce magistrates, elected popularly of instead composed being , eau ouuqeRomanus Populusque Senatus BC hr hysoea aho mutual of oath an swore they where , 36 ‘h eaeadthe and Senate (‘The Theories of citizenship and their history 37 terms to the Greeks, as selflesswarned devotion against to the public pursuit duty, and of richesand as out a of source office, of few corruption were in lifestyle willing of to Cincinnatus, emulate the the model modest Roman farming according republican to hero, legend who abandoned his plough toreturned save to the it republic once and the taskfabulously was wealthy. done. The Roman patriciate was 4. Machiavelli, the theorist of Roman republican citizenship Citizenship ohmnrights human Rome to imperial from status: legal equal as Citizenship others. to basis equal an have on to addressed groups interests different their of struggles the has from citizenship developed modern largely the how to see turn shall we we when theories, Indeed, descriptive counted. as were long and so part decisions took collective they any in figured concerns only their could ensure they because participate to reasons had self-interested citizens Consequently, interests. clash private the of from balancing be emerged and to interest had public first the the politics, of from elements removed all that interest so public opposed, the diametrically and as interest private the viewing Greek of the Instead than view. politics democratic modern more to be adaptable would easily which citizenship, of a view was realist account distinctively this Underlying Constitution. US central the a of became element powers of division Federalists, the American Madison, the especially of work the into In republic century. Dutch 18th the the of arrangements 17th political the the of War and Civil century English the of debates informed constitutional and the subject, the on writings Machiavelli’s Venice, inspired and which Florence the especially of Italy, feature Renaissance key of a states was was city It way theorists. this republican in later power by divide elaborated to for need office The hold year. to a able than none more with on, so and similar powers, with countervailing Tribunes ten decisions, other’s able the each veto Consuls, to two were and there check Accordingly, could other. both each so balance institution, or person at other with one combination least in except power or exercise person could no institution ensuring by republic restraint The other. mutual the such counter institutionalized could could each people if the restrained and be aristocracy only the of was interests experience selfish Roman the the that of lesson true the eyes, Machiavelli’s In ewe iiesi n rvt neet newn dramatic a underwent link interests the private Empire, and the citizenship by between overlaid became republic Roman the As 38 Theories of citizenship and their history civitas sine’, suffragio or 39 According to the Aristotelian ideal, politicaldepended citizenship on had being freed from thesocial burdens life of – economic both and in orderrather to than participate private and interests to were ensure the thatcontrast, object public legal of citizenship concern. has By private interestsprotection and at their its heart. Within Romanthe law, legal owners status of belonged property to and, bythese extension, included their slaves, possessions. a Since free personSo was conceived, one as who in owned many himself. respectsabout it how remains we to could this use day, law ourselves was others, and and our the things use and they those may of example make of of St us Paul and shows, our the things. resultingincluding As privileges the the and right immunities, to sue andfrom be trivial. sued However, in that given the courts, rule were ofthe far law rule can of be persons, detached in from that those subject to it do not have to be change. Eligibility for Roman citizenship wascriteria at for first Greek similar citizenship to – the citizenswho had were to the be legitimate native sons free of men expanded other – native initially free within men. Italy, As then Rome overfinally the into rest Africa of and Europe, Asia and –about. two First, important the innovations populations came of conqueredversion territories of were Roman given citizenship a while beingown allowed forms to of retain government, their including whateverthey citizenship offered. status Second, the version ofof Roman a citizenship legal given rather was than a‘citizenship political without kind the – vote’. ‘ So, the Empirecitizenship, allowed though dual it reduced Roman citizenshipAs to a a result, legal the status. legal andscope political of communities law pulled went apart. beyond The politicalco-extensive borders with and a did given not territorial need unit. to ToSt be cite Paul the – famous on case arrest of in Palestine,of he Tarsus, a proudly city declared in himself Cilicia, ‘a a Jew in citizen Tarsus, it of was no his mean additional city’. But statusallowed not as him being a to Roman claim citizen rights that againstescaping arbitrary a punishment, whipping, thereby and to ask for trial in Rome. Citizenship oe bv,terl flwi nce hog h ueo persons. of rule the through enacted is law I of as rule that, the – above, law noted fundamental or higher can implement persons and only law, interpret ordinary with the as against that, up problem come self-same always accounts such However, 4. Chapter in explored citizenship of conceptions of rights-based many contemporary inform the They constitutions. domestic for behind arguments lie many and law, rights human especially law, in international influential tremendously proved of have depictions law and These fundamental – pass. themselves may people they the laws or whatever monarch trumps absolute an political it all be binds – which law, rulers higher or superior supposedly a law as Such operates associations. human the all be of to law claim fundamental they what offer of arguments constructions it These intellectual seeking different reason. – or agency will or God’s agent nature, human in any instead of will source the the beyond identified law that of emerged quickly tradition a course, Of public. the rule for imperial and for of means rule a than becomes rather law emperor, that an is on danger depends the empire law’s then If them. and of costs each differing have for and benefits persons of will groups different systems to legal apply and many laws have different can and Law enforcers, persons. and ever or sources only person is some law by of law rule through the Yet rule themselves. ruling ruled than are rather who it empire, law’s by the of citizens subjects same imperial these the in becoming lies disadvantage without The time, contact. through direct bequests, any as acts space legal across such other through each and, with exchanging and private engaging their by pursue interests to extent, individuals and dispersed scope of in millions universal enabling be can Law to law. discretion the against their limiting act thereby account, to their officers hold and and rulers communities saw, political we of as number can, a community encompass legal the that is advantage The creates administration, its disadvantagesaswellasadvantages. or making its either in involved 40 Theories of citizenship and their history ought to 41 For example, the social contract theories ofEnglish the philosophers 17th-century Thomas Hobbes and John Locke portray Perhaps the most powerful of these intellectualhigher law constructions – of and probably thecontemporary most influential legal among and political theorists –circle sought by to bringing square together the the rulewithin of the law ideal and of the a rule social ofcenturies contract. citizens as Emerging an in account the of 17th the andpowers justification 18th of and the limits monarch of within the athe state, equal it status takes of as human its beings startingco-possessors as point of proprietors the of world. themselves The and underlyingpolitical intuition and is legal that sovereign a power just wouldequal be individuals one could to be which expected free to and consent, unanimously the consent. theory Such goes, would beoffers given fair only and to equitable a mechanisms power and that common rules interest for to securing be their able toway, pursue freeing their them own from good the in uncertainties their ofitself own mutual becoming harm a without source of harmto to unite them. the In political other ideal words, of itrule the tries and equality are of ruled virtuous in citizens, turn who the so legal as ideal to of uphold individuals the as publicprivate rights interest, interests bearers, with protected who by pursue the their rulenot of necessarily law. This rest argument on does any actualtheir consent obligation by to citizens obey to a generate justtradition, sovereign. it For many is theorists sufficient that in the this politicalorganized and that legal we system could is imagine so allhypothetically citizens consent to it – or, atreason least, not have to no do compelling so. Thethinking idea about of which a political contract and is legal simplyprinciples arrangements a treat and device people for equitably and justly. However,theories as of with God-given or natural law, thelikely terms to of be the viewed contract differently are bythe different theorists, moral according and to empirical presuppositions theytheir bring characterizations to of bear human in nature andof the social causal relations. structure Citizenship setal nteNto’ oee,teefrua rsrea preserve formulas lies these However, sovereignty Nation’. all the of in source essentially ‘the of declares Rights Citizen the the of and Declaration Man French the while People States’, United the ‘We the are of Constitution American the the So, of citizens. authors between putative contract actual an settlements of constitutional instances their as seeing by it Both resolve 1789. to of attempted Revolution French the and 1776 American of the Revolution – era democratic modern that the revolutions inaugurated great two the confronted dilemma This citizenship? legal and political uniting democracy: Modern is law that people. how with and lies mean always to applied is, thought and That is interpreted persons. law of of rule rule the the within what of lie that source always the will that law dilemma of the rule to the more once us between return theorists those and are mirror citizens there theorists as among law’ disagreements ‘higher The of it. views of many as be there to that liable indicate are Locke and Hobbes Such between government. those of as form differences limited a to consent only by would devoured be to safety, it think what nay, avoid by to them care done take be they may that mischiefs foolish, ‘to so appeared are Hobbes men it, that put think, he individual As to individuals. danger other greater than even liberty an be might to power degree state was the which and underestimated nature Hobbes human that the believe of to view inclined benign more much contrast, a By other. had each Locke to posed individuals security risks them offering the of against capable power to sovereign inclined any were to they consent and short’, and brutish ‘nasty, was the state outside life Consequently, others. distrust self-interest and their pursue aggressively to apt For were to. beings consent human would Hobbes, we what of relations, views social divergent and producing nature human of accounts different quite pole-cats,or 42 ’H eivdpeople believed He lions.’ u r content, are but foxes; Theories of citizenship and their history was too small to survive polis 43 The political and legal views ofassociated citizenship with have two come traditions to of be politicaland thought the – the liberal – republican with manybeen accounts slowly portraying displaced the by first the as second. having tradition Whereas tends the to republican see liberty ashave the participated product in of creating laws for that themselves, citizens to liberalism view has law tended as a necessarymuch evil of that the should natural seek liberty to of preservesocial individuals as life. as Nevertheless, is such compatible intellectual with constructionshandled need with to care. be For a start, therevarieties have of there republicanism been and numerous liberalism –the as Greek we and saw, for Roman example, views ofnumerous republican differences, citizenship and contained both these viewsadapted were in subsequently different ways by later thinkers.traditions Moreover, have the not two only co-existed butwith became the increasingly development mixed of democratic nationand states 20th during centuries. the Lying 19th midway betweenempire, a the city nation state state and emerged an asalternative their – most able viable to combine certainavoiding key their advantages disadvantages. while If the dualism between the ‘public’ political citizen,collective who agent acts – as the a ‘people’ or‘legal’ the ‘nation’ citizen, – who and is the the private, subject‘natural’ of rights the to law liberty, and property, the and possessor theCivic of pursuit virtue of gets happiness. assigned to aenshrined single in constitutional the moment institutions and that popularselfish act citizens creates, to leaving pursue their personalMeanwhile, interests a under tension the between law. the two modelsdoubtful remains. that It even is the most well-designedcan institutions economize and too laws much on thefeel virtues they of are citizens, ‘theirs’ or if that – citizens actively the participate founding in moment shaping apart them. – they cannot the military encroachments of empires, theto empire allow was for too meaningful large political participation. The nation state Citizenship .a ntn oiia n ea iiesi:teU Constitution US the citizenship: legal and political Uniting a) 5. htifrstescooia hoiso iiesi,t hc we which to turn. citizenship, now of theories sociological the informs development that this is It a community. of political membership democratic with national rights and participation rule political legal linking and by of popular form integrate a successfully create could to that pressures citizenship to As subject impossible. became democracy it of result, form a a – make participatory to less as if large – so credible not being while army, an economic and complex a infrastructure both sustain to size sufficient had 44 Theories of citizenship and their history 45 The making of modern democratic citizenship The sociologists T. H. Marshall and Steinwhat Rokkan has established become the standard narrativemodern of democratic the citizenship. evolution This of account draws on their 5. b) The French Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen Citizenship od ewe ohc-ainl hmevsadctzn and state. citizens their and themselves co-nationals affective both create between helped bonds also They industry. for the needed acquiring skills of generic capable workforce mobile a literacy for and appropriate numeracy of standards common guaranteed a and promoted language These armies. conscript and press, a popular standardization, linguistic education, by compulsory economy of industrial means and market a national to a suited into consciousness masses the of socialization phase the nation-making, involved third, to The regard rights. with economic particularly and – civil law the before of equality freedom and fostering contract status, ascribed of systems and social hierarchies traditional down broke legal gradually also unitary Markets and system. regular a of single establishment a the and and measures currency, and weights system, of transport system unified standardized a a as goods such public economies, infrastructural market the by of required creation the to led economies. process industrial This and commercial of emergence second the The saw subjects. phase legitimate its becoming people it those within with residing sphere, territorial given all a over within authority activities possessing body political sovereign a phase created This infrastructure. legal and elementary, bureaucratic an state-wide of creation the by and accompanied consolidation level, territorial elite the at unification cultural and administrative, military, of consisted phase state-building, first, The a economy. within market operating capitalist states nation new welfare, the democratic, within of rule context legal and preconditions popular the together of bringing certain for provided each phased, processes be three to these tended Though war. and struggle various class in by forward ways driven three all with a consciousness, of national construction the and society, industrial of and emergence commercial the of state-building, product of the processes as interrelated citizenship the saw They 18th, centuries. the 20th in and democracies 19th, European West of history the of analysis 46 Theories of citizenship and their history 47 In a brilliant essay, T. H. Marshallpotential argued offered that by the the citizenship emergence ofstates national had markets been and unleashed nation by aDrawing succession on of the class British struggles. experience, hebeen contended three that periods there in had the historicalperiod evolution had of witnessed citizenship. the Each acquisition ofand a duties different set by citizens of as rights astatus given as group a struggled full to member attain of equal roughly the from community. The the first 17th period, to mid-19th centuries,of saw the the civil consolidation rights needed toeconomic engage activities, in from a the range freedoms of to socialexchange own and goods, property services, and and labour requiredmarket, by to a the functioning liberties of thoughtattend and a conscience chosen necessary church to and toextending express from dissent. the The end second of period, thecoincided 18th with century the to gaining the of start political of rights the to 20th, vote and stand for The net effect of these threewere processes entitled was to to be create treated a as ‘people’, who equal equals rights before to the buy law and and sell possessed interests goods, were services, overseen and by labour; a whose sovereignshared political a authority; national and identity who that shapedother their and allegiance to to their each state. Alldemocratic three citizenship. elements The became first important provided for theall basis persons for as regarding entitled to thecondition equal people protection came of to the see laws was –equal unlikely a right to to obtain frame without them. an Theinterest, second most created particularly a in community controlling of sufficientlythe those state running to ensure that theconcerns rulers of responded the to ruled and rather promoted than the citizens oppressing to them. consider The themselves third as led acommon people, values sharing and certain various special obligationsanother. towards It one also fashioned the context forpeople a could public communicate sphere with in each other which and using a according common to idiom rules and practicesaccepted. that were broadly known and The Six Points or THE PEOPLE'S CHARTER. 1. A vrne. for «very man twenty-one yean* of. a#e, of tjoiniil mind, and not nnderpoiHjr punishment for crime. 2. THB RAI.UIT.—To pmtect the elector in the eierciso nf Ins vote. 3. No PwH'tirrr QUALIFICATION for Meinltcn of Parlinmeiit —thus enabling the constituencies to return the man of their t hoiec, be hfl rich or poor. & 4. PAYMENT OP MBMBER*, thus enabling nn lionest rrndn- £ man, ivoi-kiiu; man, or other person, to norvi- n eoiiBtitiiency,' g whun tjikcn from Itis business to attend to the interests of the 3 country. 5. IVJUAI. CoXHTlTVBIfviBt, seciiring tin- MHIIIP amonnt (if rpiiTTnentfttion tin- tlic ^anie number of ek'i'tors, hittnu] of itlfmvinjr small cmutitaenaicfl to swamp the voti>s of large itm-s. 6. ANNI;AI. ['ARMAUENTM, thiiM (ircscntinij the inont effrettiuJ i;heck to bribery and intimidiitifin, uinct- tlnnifjh u con*titiii-iii-\- might be bonjfht once in seven ycurx (even with the bullnU, no (nimc could btiv a eormtituency (under n KVKICIH of iinm-rcal suffrage) in each eiinuinn tvrelvemontli; m'icl ninec meinlnTs, when elected tbr_u year only, would imt he nbte to duty tnti] betray their constituent* ius now.

6. The People's Charter, demanding political rights for working people in 19th-century Britain

election, first by all property owners, then all adult males, and finally women as well. The third period, going from the end of the 19th to the mid-2 Oth century, involved the creation of social rights. Initially, these had consisted simply of'the right to a modicum of economic welfare and security' but had gradually

48 Theories of citizenship and their history 49 Marshall’s account has come in for considerablehave criticism. argued Some that he overlooks thepressures role in played promoting by rights, external others that evensets in of Britain rights the neither three arose inmentions, quite nor the proved order quite or as periods complementary thatThus, as he social he rights assumed. have emerged inthan most after countries political before rights rather – indeed,politically they dominant were class often of offered the by time the demands as for a political way rights. of Social damping rights down certain can civil also rights, clash such with as thecorrections right to to the property. However, details these of hiswith argument its are underlying perfectly logic, compatible which remainsMarshall compelling. has Although sometimes been read asalmost suggesting inevitable that progression there from is civil an tosocial political rights, to this ever was fuller not hisas view. He a saw contingent the and acquisition never-ending of struggle. rights development Each of phase rights in stems the from ato subordinate win group concessions managing from those withtreated power with in equal their concern fight and to respect. be citizenship In was these altered ways, to legal encompass newformal groups or through informal the exercise of politicalexploiting citizenship, existing often legal by rights to gaincame others. from Success the in ruling each classes case needingthe the ruled voluntary to cooperation retain of their authority. Sinceadvantage different of groups different can circumstances, take the developmentcitizenship of naturally has differed from countryexample, to the country. For need for mass conscriptSecond armies World during Wars, the and, First in and consequence, forrun women’s the labour domestic to economy, aided considerably the acquisition of been extended ‘to the right toheritage share and to to the live full the in life thestandards of social prevailing a in civilised society’. being So according these to rightsnot the came only to social include insurance against unemploymentillness, or but debilitating also more extensive rightssecondary to school, education, and at to least health up care to and pensions. Citizenship rvdn ou o atcpto ntepooino collective of promotion the in participation for focus a of providing capable communities political state alternative nation creating the without erodes globalization as autonomous citizenship more political ever from become has citizenship legal First, Marshall’sschema. two undermining In be chapters. may three developments next current altering the respects, are of they subject ways the the form and that struggles citizenship of sets three these is It defined. are participation and rights, community, the political over the struggles way new producing – problems unanticipated and own shortcomings its generates a citizenship realize equal to of attempt form each how his indicate of merely thrust They main argument. the contradict necessarily not these do narrative, observations historical Marshall’s of on. criticisms so the and with state, As nation the on focus of its issues cosmopolitans mention ethnicity, even to labour failure the the in multiculturalists women market, of role subordinate the of overlooking continued its feminists production, economic increasing on emphasis the curtail attacked than have rather Environmentalists expand citizenship. further to seeking been those also by have criticized social rested settlement and this economic which the on of Many assumptions 1990s. and 1980s, 1970s, restructuring the and of downturn economic the during celebrated eroded Marshall became settlements welfare post-war many the that of just not aspects is It conclusion. optimistic to that tended challenge have of events form subsequent egalitarian say, and to inclusive Needless more citizenship. ever culmination an the for as rights struggle social the treat of to Marshall for expanding, natural spending was welfare it and ascendant the European in West were of countries economies the when 1950s, the in Writing route. slower much and different to a changes by countries came these status in women’s result, a As absent. these were conflicts, pressures these outside Portugal, remained Spain, which as Switzerland such and countries in European Yet, many period. in this women in and countries men by rights social and political 50 Theories of citizenship and their history 51 goods. For example, international organizations such asBank, the the World World Trade Organization, and theMonetary International Fund regulate a great dealcitizens of can international control trade, them but only verygovernments. indirectly Moreover, through such their bodies are subject tolaw international and courts which have veryEven little the political EU, accountability which at does all. have directEuropean elections Parliament, to is a to special a large degreegovernment under executives, the on control the of one hand,of and Justice, the on European the Court other. As Chapterbeen 4 increasingly will defined show, in citizenship terms has ofwith global this human development. rights However, to the deal absence ofdimension a suggests political that it offers aof somewhat what second-rate being account a citizen involves.relatedly, Second, those and with to power some and extent wealth haveable become to increasingly operate without the consentpowerless. of The the more comparatively mobile poor the and wealthyto become, control the their harder activities it and is topublic tax goods. them As so a they consequence contribute of to capacity these for two citizenship developments, to the be shapedmay through have processes declined. of struggle Chapter 3 Membership and belonging

Membership lies at the heart of citizenship. To be a citizen is to belong to a given political community. However, this link with membership renders citizenship ‘exclusive’ in ways that have become increasingly controversial. It makes citizens part of a select group, who enjoy privileges denied to non-members. Just as members of an exclusive golf club can use its greens and facilities in ways non-members cannot, so possessing the status of a citizen gives you access to the advantages of membership of a given political community. And just as the rules regulating the membership of golf clubs has often attracted criticism for being inappropriate or discriminatory, so have those conferring the status of citizenship. Indeed, many of the grounds for complaint have been remarkably similar – just as golf clubs have been condemned for limiting membership to well-born, white, rich men, so birth, ethnicity, wealth, and gender have formed the standard – and increasingly contested – criteria for citizenship.

Much like exclusive golf clubs, states have typically justified their exclusions on the grounds that prospective members must be able to contribute in appropriate ways and ‘fit in’ with existing members and the prevailing ethos. If golf clubs vet prospective members for their ability to pay the fees, prowess at golf, willingness to abide by the club rules and conventions, and their

52 Membership and belonging 53 The necessity and unavoidability of livingexclusivity in associated a with state citizenship makes doubly the problematic.seems First, invidious it to exclude those whopower are from subject full to membership, a possessing given the state’s citizens. same Second, rights given as that other the statean you accident initially of find birth, yourself it in may is people seem moving equally to invidious become to members hinder ofthem a better different opportunities, state if that they offers areas willing well to as take enjoy on the the rights duties explore of these citizenship. internal In and this external chapter, I dimensions wantexclusiveness of to of the citizenship. I shall startfor by the exploring traditional the qualifications rationale based onand class, ethnicity property, gender, and the internal challenges that have been posed to general sociability and likely commitment toassess club citizens events, for so their states potential contributiongoods to of the the collective community and theirby readiness its and norms capacity and to customs. abide Incriteria each for case, admission suspicion are arises self-serving that the andapplicants fail with to equal treat concern all and respect.all-important However, an difference exists between golf clubscommunities. and Membership political of a political communitypeople is for both most necessary and unavoidable inof ways a that golf membership club is not.choice, The and decision even to dedicated take golfers up can golfregularly probably is without manage a belonging to matter to of play a clubcontrast, or it learn is to virtually live impossible without not it.only to By cover live most in of a the state. earth, StatesChapter but not 1 also – – provide as the we basic sawlife structure in within for societies a of secure any and complexity. fulfilled Statelessnessresults almost when always state failure of oneflee kind – or be another it leads due people to to famine, invasion and or conquest an by oppressive another regime. state, Thoselive civil in war, outside this any condition state. do Rather, not they aresupplicants forced for to whatever become aid and supportreceive those them, states or willing unable to to avoid doing so, condescend to provide. Citizenship rtraadteqaiisascae ihbigacitizen. a being with associated qualities three the these and between criteria connection has the citizenship breaking of on view turned inclusive largely more a and see, gender shall to we linked As those ethnicity. to property on to move related then those and with ownership to start arguments shall such I relate qualities. longer specific no these would we if citizenship even with applies, far linkage still how historical pondering their and behind turn lying in reasoning a each the be taking to worth means is it it what So about citizen. think we how which shape attributes to these continues with citizenship rationale of underlying association an the is to there stage Yet, some them. at of or several lack, lacked, citizens have most indeed, – qualities any these possess of not do citizens as Many today discriminatory. hand and of unwarranted out seems qualifications It these male. reject and to blood, natural Athenian of warrior, the a of others, master of a owner, labour property and Athenian householder The a years. was 2,000 citizen almost for key citizen the the of of many attributes defining ancient shadow, in long citizenship a for cast criteria have the Greece how 2 Chapter in remarked I exclusion and inclusion dimension of internal the citizen: to subject From exclusive. externally remaining while internally, become inclusive to more membership progressively for criteria the for allowed of context has – main citizenship chapter the last as the states of welfare end democratic, the national, shall at we charted As duty. – mere development beyond the goes see, that also fashion but some part in their belong play to to simply whether not and citizens involve requires what to membership on thought turns are much citizenship cases, of both duties In the 4. Chapter in particular state any or of nation membership beyond of going discussion as extensive citizenship more global a of for categories scene particular the of setting exclusion outsiders, the examine then shall I each. 54 Membership and belonging oikos) and rulesnomos). ( To 55 In ancient Greece, being the patriarchmore of than a simply household owning was a much home.component The of house the was economy the – basic indeed,from the the term Greek ‘economy’ words derives for household ( These three properties of dedication toindependence, the and public possession good, of a stakecommunity in remain the important political for thinking abouttime politics, the but qualities over associated with themfrom have the become possession detached of private property. Ingeneral fact, reversal there of has assumptions: been instead a ofbeing private the autonomy basis of public autonomyparticipation in and the the political regulation realm, of political thethe private guarantees sphere of have personal become freedom. So,of to devotion take to the the first public property good, we still want to prevent politics Property and the properties of citizenship be a householder signified being economicallyone’s self-sufficient, material with needs taken care of bynot a least range one’s wife of as domestic an servants, unpaidfeatures household of manager. this Three condition were deemedFirst, important as for I politics. mentioned in thecould last devote chapter, it themselves meant to that their citizens civicneed duties, to being earn freed a from livelihood. the Lessabove plausibly, they any were need also to supposedly pursue theirnot private only interests. Second, freed they from a were dependencythe on dependants things of but other also people. from Indeed, being course, they they owned still others. needed Of food andothers so to on provide to the survive, necessary and goods. reliedothers But on as they they could chose, direct sell those themand if so they on. failed Unlike to their act dependants, as theyto they act were wished, independent and – think able as theywhom believed they best depended rather for than their as living thosethey directed. on literally Finally, it had meant a stake infate the – political or community, with at their least thatto of the their extent assets of – being intimately willing boundcountry. to to fight its and fate, possibly die for their Citizenship ersnaiedmcayadtesse fcmeigparties. competing of system the and was democracy possible representative changes these made that innovation The interest. public the for they act showing and by lead success could achieving politics, ‘for’ political live their and develop skills to incentive an politicians a gave politics profession making Likewise, politicians obligations. freeing private for their means from best the earn was sector, could private politicians the many in than public lower a far that – often opposite one the albeit salary, quite to changed score this on thinking positions, government holding those with office. starting public Gradually, from wealth effectively private it without Meanwhile, salary. those any debarred than friends their interests of business those their or favouring gain decisions could making politicians from that more was far argument Of this politics. in ‘for’ flaw than the rather course, ‘off’ Weber live Max would sociologist politicians German it, the put as that, a – than duty rather civic enrichment of private matter for means turn a would payment into feared service was public they it those hand, to other interests the a sectional On creating of governed. ruled, set be distinct and a rule with to class turns political in it taking citizens the of undermine system to thought one was the politics On professionalizing the politicians. hand, prevent of to class was professional aim a The of name. development but all in salaries turned into have these reforms subsequent though for tasks, a allowances various that councillors performing 1974 local until paying not for was introduced it was level: scheme local the formally at it case Britain the in remains Indeed, century. 19th the politicians into pay well to salaries inappropriate thought generally public was disinterested it for service, prerequisite a thinking was the wealth with private line that in example, completely For today accounts. happening earlier this overturns stop to seek we way the However, attention. to their having for or them politicians with and compete citizens of entangled interests either private becoming the and with gain personal of source a being 56 Membership and belonging 57 What about self-interest? A common, ifcriticism not of necessarily democracy accurate, is that citizenspossibly vote short-sighted in ways. self-interested Such and considerations haveinvoked been for curtailing the scope forand democratic handing decision-making certain areas to anpublic-spirited allegedly elite more of disinterested ‘the and great andreturn the to good’. Again, these we issues shall in Chapterwhile 5. these Here concerns it still suffices linger, to they note nobecoming that longer a form citizen a – barrier merely to toTrue, what there citizens have may been be arguments allowed that to thoseshould do. who be draw barred welfare from voting becauseclosely their allied private to interest increasing is public spendingcontribute, to though which in they fact do this not groupvote is and among has the the least least likely influence to have in argued society that generally. Yet, the many public interestinterests simply of is the the citizens. aggregate Certainly, as wethere saw is in a the real last danger chapter, thatallowed unless to those express subject their to interests government politically are overlooked. then So they rather will than be seeing thethe public private interest interests as of apart citizens, from as was argued in the past, it seems This development also had implications foron the citizens. demands Citizens placed remain eligible asable potential to rulers put in themselves being forward asservice candidates is for no office. longer But expected public ofInstead, the the vast main majority task of for citizens. citizenscompetition is to between select parties rulers. and It their is alternationallows the in different office groups that of citizens, viarepresentatives, their to elected rule and be ruledmembership in is turn. no The longer key whether issue a for rule potential but citizen rather is whether qualified they to arethe qualified suitability to of vote others and for to public evaluate participation office. By far making less political onerous it comesall within adults, the even grasp though of some almost havedevalued argued as it to thereby be becomes worthless, so a pointHowever, lack we of shall time consider no in longer Chapter forms 5. a barrier. Citizenship tutrsta euaetecniin ne hc econtract we which under and laws conditions the the of regulate achievement that public structures a but wealth a private longer of no matter is independence dependence, circumstances mutual these universal In of services. with and contract labour, freely goods, – their powerful for and others rich fabulously must the we even Instead, – so. all and become organized could globally they a where in economy situation complex a and imagine dependants, to personal hard our is are it others these our of supply none to But others needs. numerous on rather depend do and all jobs we specialist and economies, formal market a In both sense. in substantive status a a of and equalizing normative the a for both foothold created practical It effect. also levelling dependence certain mutual a of had universality the out, Yet, pointed wealth. Smith considerable as with those destroyed for goods even luxury independence for such desire a feared, always and Machiavelli had as Rousseau, such theorists, republican the civic by As represented household. system economic the autonomous self-sufficient, an was of who master someone A be other. longer each no on could dependent man’ became ‘free all we that but was was example, politics one of professionalization the emerging which the of by society, allowed market labour of the division of the feature of central intensifying a how noting by position the classical of defence radical Adam Rousseau’s Jean-Jacques philosopher criticized Scottish Smith the century, 18th late the As enjoy. as could early none that ‘independence’ for social conditions and the economic of understanding view anachronistic this an that on earlier rested much plain of become mass had vast it However, the people. of exclusion the to justifying up century, prevailed 19th independence the lack will on livelihood depend their who for those others that view classical citizen, the good Again, the independence. of property second the traditional concerning overturned thinking has assumptions of reversal similar A whole. a as community the of those to linked that are citizens interests among their sense one a the promoting with other, linked, the as by two informed the regard to now appropriate more 58 Membership and belonging 59 Of course, even with this publicremain support, in there a may natural be state some of who from dependency. Children full are citizenship excluded on the groundsthe that capacity they of have independent yet reasoning to or develop are living necessarily on dependent their on own, the and viewsparents. and The support mentally of ill their or disabledsimilar tend grounds. to Even be these excluded categories on ofcontroversy. exclusion However, have on prompted the whole, criticism hasareas, been such about as grey whether children becomeeconomic capable independence of – intellectual and and hence shouldvote qualify – for at the 21, 18, or, as has been recently proposed in the UK, 16, In Chapter 2, I noted thatproduct the of idea a of contract political society offers a asmodelling powerful itself such theoretical the a tool fair for social andcontract political also system. had Freedom of important practical consequences,allowing eventually workers to organize and useequalize their first bargaining the power terms to and conditionsthen of their their legal employment standing and in otherkey areas became too, to including ensure politics. all The citizensthemselves could rather make than decisions having for to deferbecause to they another’s opinion depended on them entirelyinformation. for At their least livelihood a and part ofeducation the and rationale welfare, behind for rights example, to isindependence that as they citizens secure by people’s removing suchformer dependence. enables The citizens to access andthemselves, assess the information latter for means they are neveranother entirely for at the the necessities mercy of of life.publicly Moreover, the supporting justification these for measures stems fromreciprocity duties between of citizens that again followof from mutual their dependence. condition with others. Since these regulations applynormative to presumption all, that there the is terms a ofshould our be mutual fair dependency and acknowledge reciprocalequal rights respect and and duties concern. of Citizenship .TePte eae,Otbrt oebr1647 November to October Debates, Putney The 7. icsin ftepicpeo oe o l h unyDbtsof Debates War. Putney Civil the English – the all during for 1647 earliest votes the of of principle one the of of heart discussions the at was it 19th example, For the century. into well persisted political argument the this in Again, stake community. of a property of third evidence the provides serves and it it citizenship – well reasons how related questioned for be – also so can independence, or devotion good of public guarantee the a to seems longer no property private as Just independence of notion the rejecting outright. of result a as than rather 60 Membership and belonging 61 However, if property is a poor guideare to tied whether to a those citizen’s of interests thelong-term political commitment community, some does sign seem of appropriate. Afternot all, only citizens derive benefits from the state but also can influence its Certain factions in the army thatagainst had the supported King Parliament believed that evenright common to soldiers political had liberty. earned In a a famousColonel defence Rainsborough, of the political most equality, articulate ofas the it ‘Leveller’ came faction, to be known,Englandhathalifetolive,asthegreatesthe;andtherefore...the argued ‘that the poorest he thatpoorest is man in in England is notgovernment bound that in he a hath strict not sense had to aresponse that voice of to the put ‘grandees’ himself gathered under’. around The conventional Cromwell wisdom reflected of the the time. SpeakingIreton on retorted their that behalf, ‘no Henry person hathin a the right disposing to of an the interest affairs oror of share choosing the those kingdom, that and shall in determine determining byhere–...thathathnotapermanentfixedinterestinthis what laws we shall be ruled kingdom’. And, he implied, the most tangiblepermanent sign fixed of interest’ such was ‘a ownership ofother part words, of its landed territory property. Yet, – the in linkownership between and property a concern with thecommunity long-term has interests always of been the a wider contingenttoday’s and globalized partial economy one, where and key in assets areinvestors owned has by become foreign even more dubious.the It owners all will depends benefit how from far anyassets positive may effects have their for use their of fellow those effects citizens of or their share activities. with Unfortunately, them this any isand ill often they not can the gain case more fromdamage exploiting the their ‘permanent property fixed in ways interests’ that ofThe the classic wider example community. is pollution. Unlesspolicies environmentally benefit friendly the owners of atheir company profits – or either because by they enhancing themselvesunfriendly are policies adversely – affected then by they willthem, have and no indeed incentive often to do pursue not for this very reason. Citizenship iies a,avt ncranBiihevrnetlpolicies environmental British certain on Danish vote giving a contrast, say, By citizens, both. in rights voting full having with citizens local, the encompassing community political national oa oiisfrntoa nsand ones national of for effects policies knock-on local the national to for given criteria is demanding consideration more Yet, the citizenship. elections, meet local not in do vote they and if residence, even of basis the as on qualify citizens people local many countries, other and Britain in Moreover, as such nationally, decided defence. as are such that region, issues small and fairly collection, a dustbin affect effectively only most need be and can by they organized because level, local best a are at that decided issues between differentiation some within is even True, there borders. states the outside a those have on will impact policies significant selective of few range a whole only the measures, by government degree substantial be fairly will a we to means affected space territorial delimited reasonably a of sharing whereas citizens However, as us. treated affects be organization should political we whatever that argued As border. have the some across result, living a those to effectively emissions but noxious residents, the local exports for news good be tall may construct say, to chimneys, factories forcing policy a Thus, telling example. a offer again its once outside measures Environmental reside may borders. policies that state – many below by explored affected be those to – remains problem a Nevertheless, on equally impact will you. they not because will citizens that fellow policies affect pursuing adversely to committed is one property that than ownership sign tangible more elsewhere. a reside offers to residence choose Certainly, the they with if birth, rights by certain citizens losing are latter who to those wishing for immigrants also for but just naturalize, not – citizenship a full residence for continuous criterion of period have significant states a Many made make. therefore they decisions the through shape future 62 ieversa vice yvru fthe of virtue by Membership and belonging 63 Meanwhile, mere residence or being affected maythemselves not offer a in sufficient stake in amotivate political people community to to try and ensureeffective that if its they policies do are not efficient have and colonists to declared pay for independence, them. they When did the sobasis American in of large the part slogan on that the thererepresentation’. should But, be as ‘no I taxation noted without above, itreverse was should long equally thought hold that true the –ought that not those to who be did represented. not Otherwise, paymotive taxes they to would encourage have governments no to pursueSimilar cost-effective reasoning policies. has led some todisenfranchise argue the that elderly, one who should may have incentivesthe not future to – save say, for by greatly raisingwhich spending are on paid their for pensions, by thepensioners subsequent have generation. children Of and course, hence most anLikewise, interest those in on their welfare future. gain ingovernment other policies ways and from have efficient an interestremaining in strong the enough economy to be ableMoreover, to many pay argue their that benefits. they have acontributors duty to to state at revenues least by be being potential to available go for on work, training willing courses, andworkfare so or on. ‘mutual Such obligation’ arguments schemes lie in behind theCanada, and United States, Australia. This view thatshould to be qualify not for just citizenship affected you bysustaining policies them but follows also from contribute the to notionthe of heart reciprocity of that national lies welfare at states – that citizens cooperate to because measures such as tall chimneyspollutes result their in lakes, acid would rain be that inequitabledistort if the they political were agenda able so to thatprotection spending to on benefit environmental Danes undermined nationaleducational health policies or benefiting British citizens asproblems a might whole. be Such got round ifa one global could political regard community issues as that somehow affect policies, encompassing but national as the experience ofso the neat. EU suggests, matters are not Citizenship iiesi n iiaysrie leti uhmr inclusive more much a in albeit of view service, republican military old and the citizenship of War. World importance First the the reaffirmed of event slaughter This mass the of untenable, light became in for particularly fighting was be one might what it and when demanded over ultimate say the some Requiring granting hand. without in sacrifice hand went adult less fit or all of more males conscription the and of suffrage introduction adult The male 20th armies. universal early mass and for 19th need late the the with in centuries about came Once pay. change their major from a weapons again, their purchase into to coerced had be and to service had but willingly few enlisted centuries, soldiers 18th ordinary and 17th the armies during as Even professionalized dependants. became their and among raise from or army themselves an arm fund could who those warriors were only counted the who times, of medieval heading and the ancient under in topic Yet, this property. include to So, odd above. seem reported may demands it Levellers’ the behind lay ideas All these debates. subsequent in a lost for though militia’, need ‘well-regulated the US with the right to this Amendment of Second association the Constitution’s in the implicit of point defence a the – in country participate so to arms duty bear citizen’s to a ‘right’ as individual much an imply Note, not check. does in argument rulers this a keep was to army citizen’s democracy A to ruled. complement the necessary dominate to able then army, be professional would a they create or mercenaries use could if rulers that was worried it theorists uphold republican to Moreover, bit service. one’s align military do to and willingness state a the of with sign interests one’s tangible most the time long a For their of period the imprisonment. for just not and permanently sometimes disenfranchised are felons convicted the where in States, especially United – this controversial though increasingly contract, become social has this practice broken have they that on grounds precisely the citizenship from political excluded a are by Criminals provided association. are that goods public the sustain 64 Membership and belonging 65 The first criticism is undeniable. Bothextent in today, the men past have and turned to women some intowhom personal they dependants, can treat as unpaidthey domestic will. servants Economic and dependency direct resulting as frommain the ‘bread-winner’ man being and, the up to thepossession 19th of century, his coming wife’s into assets on marriage,by was coercion, often including reinforced the legally sanctionedforce use – of marital physical rape, for example,criminalized was until not well recognized into in the law 20th or century in many Many of the traditional attributes of citizenshipassociated have with been male roles, such aswere soldiering, excluded. from This which fact women has producedcritique a of two-pronged the feminist way citizenship haspractised. come First, to feminists be have defined argued and thatcitizenship the has public often practice rested of on theSecond, private they domination have of argued women. that citizenshipterms has of been masculine conceived qualities. in Gender and the feminist critique Like all the other shifts notedmen above, alone. this Moreover, change it initially was affected accompanied by,assumed, and a largely more thoroughgoing cultural identificationstate with stemming the from nationality – onlywould patriots, be it prepared was to thought, die forthis their section country. Accordingly, explores the how rest far of theso criteria far for involve citizenship a explored gender and cultural bias. form that once again de-privatized thedisassociating right it to from bear having arms property by inMeanwhile, one’s weapons. it has become ever morereturned redundant as to wars being have fought by professionalon armies private and security even firms, to though rely thisrevives development the potentially classic republican worries aboutcitizenship the and separation the of right and duty to fight. Citizenship o ecno e oiisa etn napepltclprivate pre-political a on resting as politics indicates see it cannot level, we another how At unsuited. for somehow or are them they beneath which either is that work, or ‘women’s’ care are child cleaning that assumptions example, male for challenging – women politics through involves of that channels attitudes formal social the of outside change action a for this need level, the one to At political’. points the the on is centres personal typically ‘the approach slogan new feminist a require we that politics? claim to The approach feminist distinctively a de-gendering involve does particular, citizenship In for politics? implications about its think are we what how and altered, be situation this can How politicians worse. national considerably of do 16% women, only are where States, United many, the indeed as – better such little fare democracies most of legislature, 40% the around the comprise of women exception where the countries, Scandinavian With member Housing. unpaid for 23rd Minister out the female 5 Cabinet, the only the being – of writing members of paid time 22 the the at of – and example, for Parliament women, of are Members British of 20% many than than Fewer worse professions. rather no performs is it Politics indeed, men. – full-time exception to relative hour per full-time less working 17% women earn Even per full-time. less working 38% men average, than on hour earn, part-time revealed work UK who the women in that survey recent most A in positions. rewarded management well senior less and under-represented part-time are low-paid, and in jobs, predominate women result, to a mainly As fall women. still remain and roles under-supported, caring and – unpaid century largely that of half second the passed during legislation pay equal and mid-20th anti-discrimination the to by century, to democracies rights established voting all equal almost obtaining in women men from – years 100 a past being the over not changes as legislative out major factored Despite became responsibility. family post-holder’s a raising maintenance and the home that a structured of so be to politics, including ‘male’ jobs, allowed labour domestic women’s of Control jurisdictions. 66 Membership and belonging 67 Significant though both these ways ofpolitical’ conceiving are the for ‘personal women, as they reflecttrajectory the the general understanding historical of citizenship hasbeing taken distinctively rather ‘feminist’. than As I noted incommon Chapter to 1, employ it an is enlarged now viewencompasses of our citizenship broader that social and moralAs obligations I to also others. remarked, important thoughpolitics, social there morality is is nonetheless for a distinctivecollective role decision-making to within be the played formal by politicalthe process state. of The key change inthat this giving regard women has the been personal the freedom recognition necessary in for the them private to sphere be ableothers to is participate in on fact an a equal public basisfair matter to system – of it public results rules from and puttingthe collective in sharing place policies of a that domestic encourage tasks andindividuals does taking not on discriminate caring against roles foron. children or Yet, we the have elderly seen and how so thisprivate reversal autonomy of does assumptions, not whereby provide thethe basis public for sphere participation but in is ratherparallels the precisely product the of route such taken participation, bytoo the had property-less. to For they overcome the private barriers to their public sphere. On the contrary, politics and itsthemselves preconditions politically are and publicly constructed. Marriage,is after a all, legal relationship and therape law unlawful. can Likewise, enter ensuring the employers bedroom have to angrant decree maternity obligation and to paternity leave and providingfor state child funding care are public measuresrestructure that personal will relationships. to Both some of degree thesewill developments clearly help women participate ashopefully citizens altering and prejudices politicians, to choosing womenmaking candidates the and political workplace more compatiblewomen with sharing men domestic and and family responsibilities.clearly, Equally as the figures reported above indicatechange all will too only starkly, come with sustainedand and even concerted then public will effort, be painfully slow. 8. Marching for women’s suffrage, New York City, 1913 (top), and a May Day workers’ rights demonstration, New York, 2000 (bottom) Membership and belonging 69 Nationality, ethnicity, and multiculturalism As we have seen, the developmentcitizenship of rested a on more the inclusive emergence account of of democratic publicly welfare supported systems. Historically, these systems arosethe in context of state- and nation-building.concerns A how key far issue this today connection betweenon democracy the and one welfare, hand, and theof nation historical state, contingency on that the can other, was now a be matter overcome. The second feminist argument, that citizenshipunderstood needs in to feminine be rather than masculinecontroversial. terms, Historically, is women more have been viewed asto unsuited citizenship on the grounds thatby they their are passions too rather emotional than – reason, ruled those and for liable whom to they be feel partial particular to acting attachments impartially. rather The than claim of some, thoughfeminists far is from that all, reason, impartiality, and universalismmasculine are ways indeed of thinking, and thatapproach women centred take on a affection more and ‘caring’ feelingYet, for because particular men others. and women have neverequal been footing on with a each completely other, it isattitudes impossible result to from know any which possible differences inwhat their is nature simply and the product ofthere cultural are and women social and norms. men As on itcharacter both is, of sides moral of and this political debate reasoning. aboutthe Indeed, the appropriate discussion role of and balance betweenrights universal and accounts justice, of on the oneties hand, of and duty, more on particular, the affective other, largelysurrounding shapes membership the – other namely, major how issue far citizenshiplimited should to be co-nationals who share certaincharacteristics. ethnic or cultural involvement by organizing for better workingeducation, conditions, welfare, and so on –that challenging such in issues their were turn purely the non-political. view Citizenship ihdge frcpoiybtenpol n h oto special of sort the and people a between entail reciprocity They of are. degree these high though important general, owe in we people obligations to humanitarian the than more and involve democracy welfare, as pertinent such certain activities, in cooperative similar Second, as ways. regard with they engage whom to those easier trust it and find people First, normative, functional. partly partly sociological, and partly is claim cooperate This to other. them each enables with and interests many and their opinion beyond of reaches differences that people between bond a create supposedly commonalities shared These a language. on and draws history, that culture, identity common trusting a and creating solidaristic by foster feelings to said is nationality common A and legitimate are employ. agree can involved all that discourses and Finally,customs, turn. institutions, their common in assumes burden decisions the collective of making part and, a latter shoulder the to of successful, conditions the if improve to the best in their trust doing and former ‘have-nots’ the towards the solidarity on showing depends ‘haves’ similarly Welfare power. in process stay electoral to the themselves halting or again, rigging winning their ever justifying their thereby prevent will in successors defeat their concedes election – government an part incumbent their an play if will example, nobody for that that, be will fear the trust, decisions. Without majority accept to to unwilling minorities be may minorities, Majorities accommodate free-ride. to even inclined and be them might benefited then that decisions collective those to only tempted obey be would individuals trust solidarity, mutual Without enough cooperate. and to decisions collective accept to other each sue epe or people, a Democracy assumes reinforcing. mutually any are to and vital endeavour are cooperative trust and and Solidarity frame policies. to collective citizens sustain of capacity the generally while more trust, facilitating and solidarity creating of in contribution sentiment alleged national the on a rests of system aspect welfare inherent democratic an is nation-building that argument The h elsfcetsldrt with solidarity sufficient feel who demos, 70 Membership and belonging 71 How can that be? First, theyeffectively argue then that some if common people structures are are tonecessary. going interact So to there be will need to beexisting broad legal acceptance and that political the institutions are,nevertheless if the not appropriate perfect, mechanism through whichchange any must take place – includingthemselves. changes Second, to there those must institutions also beco-citizens the on desire equal to terms engage and with to frame common laws and policies On this account, therefore, nationality definesprovides citizenship. the It social glue and mediuminteract that on enables equal citizens terms to in thewhile life state-building of and the nation-building political went community. Yet, handpast, in there hand are in obvious the problems inbetween drawing the too two. tight It a is connection estimated9,000 that ethnic-cultural there groups are in between the 5,000 world, and states, and over only 90% around of 200 which containovercome more this than diversity, one nation-building ethnic in group. the To pastor involved all some of the following: genocide,coerced forced assimilation, mass-population and transfers, domination and controlgroup. by With the most ruling states being formedindigenous through peoples war and and minority conquest, national, religious,linguistic ethnic, groups and have all suffered from theseas sorts have later of immigrant oppression, minorities. No respectablenationalism today advocate believes of that such methodsacceptable. are Instead, in they any argue way that aonly common accommodate nationality diversity can but not makes it possible. obligations to particular others that existand among good family neighbours. members Not only arecreate such and obligations sustain difficult among to all humandiffering beings, cultures but will also want people to of shapebut them far in from different ways. least, Last, a sharedgreatly language facilitate and communication political and traditions decision-making, makingeasier it for all to participate onfor equal misunderstanding terms or and incompatibility reducing clashes. the scope 9. A citizenship ceremony in Australia, 2005 Membership and belonging 73 However, the discriminatory effects of such decisionsmitigated can in be all sorts of ways.laws There that can penalize be certain exemptions cultural from practices,exemption such of as Sikhs the from British the wearingThere of can motorcycle be helmets. assistance for minoritiesdisadvantages, to from overcome state certain support for culturalthe activities, funding including of religious schools asand in the the symbolic UK, recognition to of affirmative their action, through acceptance multi-faith – policies for for example, religious educationceremonies. and There public can be the devolution of certain Typically, these policies have arisen as responsesgrowing to multicultural fears unrest of and violence andrising concerns rates over of immigration. As acriticism result, in they certain have quarters attracted as perpetuatingdiminishing rather discrimination than towards minority groups, witharguing some such policies should be replacedon by human considerations rights based norms and internationalthese law. I arguments shall more consider fully in the nextresponse chapter. from However, the the nationalist short would bealways that need rights to norms be will realized withinfleshes a them given out cultural in context, specific which ways.will Moreover, such never acculturation be neutral in itsabout effects. public Choices holidays, will the have official to language(s), be andinevitably made so impact on on that some will minorities more than others. in ways that can be justifiedrequirements as are reasonable consistent to with all. citizens Such givingthe their state, allegiance having to some knowledge ofinstitutions, its being political reasonably history fluent and in itslanguages, main and language having or an appreciation ofand the sensibilities cultural of conventions its members. Indeed,have Western democracies increasingly codified these elements ofcitizenship, a enshrining common them national both in testsacquisition and of ceremonies citizenship for and the in theschools. teaching of citizenship in Citizenship comdto spsil,ntbywe ioiypatcsare practices minority when notably much possible, how is to accommodation limits are there polity any in Moreover, the of diversity. many of confront issues to self-same if have although would UK, countries the new in the Scotland successful and Canada the in proved Quebec has in as case succession, even and independence demands greater weaken for than rather strengthen can institutions where devolved minorities, concentrated territorially with is exception partial The diversity. and clear multiculturalism equally to an commitment with accompanied are they more where proving acceptable citizenship national common with a reverse, promoting the policies suggest well. to as tends liberals evidence many empirical by the endorsed However, been also this has take it to but tended line, has identity, a civic has republican which of France, tradition participation. strong in reduction a solidarity and of trust loss and consequent a with and identities, status civic equal fragmenting from detracting – project the citizenship undermining whole as measures these criticized some have Yet, equality. commentators civic their reflect better political that for of cooperation attempt norms the acceptable reflect mutually they negotiate contract, to social citizens a To of societies. image modern the up to make return that groups diverse belonging very of the common sense among a a of creating notion inclusive, the more render citizenship to national is policies these of purpose The UK. the has as them, adopt of to all tended almost have States, United the and as Canada, such Australia, immigration, of countries these traditional of and some policies, adopt the states with Most occurs respectively. as Scots systems, and legal Welsh parallel policies of multilingual allowance be the can even There and Zealand. case New the in is Maori as the bodies, for public in communities) representation immigrant special and/or for Canada, (also in Inuit indigenous the and as UK, such the groups, in Irish Northern with and case Welsh, the Scots, is the as minorities, national to rights self-government 74 Membership and belonging 75 So far I have defined beingproperties a – citizen notably, in a terms linking of of certain one’spublic private interest, interests including and a the commitment towillingness the to country contribute and to a its economic,public social, goods and by political working, paying taxes,to and evaluate voting, political and performance a and capacity exercisejudgements. independent I have also noted thatrelies extending on such seeing properties them to as all publicwhile rather their than joint private exercise responsibilities, is facilitatednationality. by Finally, a I sense have of claimed common seeing citizenshipterms in need these not discriminate against womenand or nationalities. minority Instead, cultures they have beenreshape able national progressively political to cultures to reflectequality. their Perhaps claims the to crucial civic test of their success, though, is how From alien to citizen: the external dimension of exclusion deemed to infringe human rights. For example,democracies have Western outlawed such practices ascircumcision. so-called female However, numerous hard cases exist, particularly with regard to the education ofwomen, children who and have attitudes a towards subordinate rolecases, in a many potential cultures. tension In exists these betweencertain the traditional maintenance practices of and protecting thechildren, opportunity and for particularly women, to choosetraditional whether norms they or abide adapt by or evenexploring drop instead them the altogether, wider possibilities openbroader to community. them These in tensions the have been resolveddifferent in ways in different countries, but theto sign common of citizenship a derives commitment from allsolutions affected that parties are seeking capable of beingterms. justified In in these mutually ways, acceptable a national citizenshipimposed ceases by a to dominant be group something oninvolving others a but degree a of shared compromise civic and project, adaptation on all sides. Citizenship xsigctzn,ntbigdsge nsc a st oc all affiliations, force and to identities as pre-existing way renounce a to such immigrants in designed being not most citizens, by existing answered are be culture could and and politics straightforward on reasonably questions the and language basic required are the skills requirements, test meeting other for and support language public the is there and groups, and similar ethnically culturally favouring to not welcoming countries, generally all as from seen immigrants is country they the which If in imposed. manner are and context as the perceived on are depends they discriminatory far How community. full political a the be of to member someone for necessary thought have been that traditionally above outlined properties These the doctors. codify as conditions such skills, economic desirable favoured with have test those and a institutions, and and test, customs, language history, a national years, on four to three around of commitment, normally show to requirements residence having usually through immigration, limit do countries democratic wealthy, All demands group. rising second limit this to from governments for is legitimate issue is key it The whether life. from better – or assist different to a duty seeking legal immigrants a Protocol, Refugees 1967 of its Status and the (1951) of on case Convention the Geneva in the and of this humanitarian, signatories separate a to have want countries I whom two, – the group divides often oppression. line or grey war a by Though countries their of asylum out from driven come seekers, has pressure this of Some are unprecedented. trends migratory and variety, contemporary scope, of global volume the sustained of But periods past. been the have in there migration course, massive Of 1965. – in 2000 number in the migrants double million is 150 it around but by, were come there to estimated hard are figures pressures Reliable migratory grown. as have salient increasingly become has issue This immigrants. for would-be grounds for defensible admission offer criteria membership resulting the far 76 Membership and belonging 77 Such failures have tended to bringcitizenship the and whole membership linkage of between a nationSo state long into as disrepute. this link exists,admission however, it to will citizenship be by justified criteria to thatnecessary limit reflect for the participation attributes in a nationalYet, political some community. commentators have argued this connectionuntenable, is both simply practically and morally, in ourglobalized increasingly societies. Instead, they seek toterms define of citizenship universal in human rights. It isdefinition to is the normatively degree and to practically which possible such that a I now turn. then these conditions can enjoy broaduncontroversial, support, even or among at immigrant least communities. be For example, in Canada, where citizenship andbecome immigration increasingly policy open has since the 1960s,been these largely, policies if have not universally, accepted aslegitimating legitimate – and making it easier ratherto than feel harder full for members immigrants of theircitizenship new criteria country. There, for the immigrants external are butbroader the and counterpart more to multicultural a internal citizenshipcontrast, policy. By when set against a backgroundimmigrants of tinged suspicion with towards racism, as tends tocolonial be powers, the such case as with Britain, former thesesuspicion policies and can regarded be as met exclusionary with –recent a times fear by reinforced seemingly in panicked responsesgovernments by to some the emerging link betweencommunities immigrant and terrorism. By and large,potential attempts fears to of allay native-born the citizens haveappearing tended to to give backfire, such worries credenceimmigrant while communities alienating and the exacerbating social tensions. Chapter 4 Rights and the ‘right to have rights’

Citizenship is often identified with rights. In a trivial sense, this identification always exists because whatever citizenship policies a given country puts in place will bestow the equivalent rights on citizens. Such rights are generally called ‘positive’ or ‘institutional’ rights. For example, British citizenship is defined by the various rights associated with the numerous policies ordaining who is a citizen and what they are entitled to: from the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, governing processes of naturalization, to the Representation of the People Act 2000, covering voting arrangements, and the various Social Security Acts, dealing with unemployment, sickness, maternity, pensions, and other benefits. These and similar pieces of legislation all spell out the rights that follow from the status of being a British citizen – from voting to welfare. However, the details of these rights differ from country to country and possibly even within a country. The rights of English citizens are not identical in every respect to those of Scottish citizens, say, and differ even more from those of American or French citizens. Moreover, they need not be either just or equitable – even Nazi laws conferred certain rights on German citizens, although they also condemned many to being less than citizens.

Consequently, when people invoke rights as the basis of citizenship, they generally intend something rather different. They

78 Rights and the ‘right to have rights’ 79 to have the positive or institutional rights ought Popular and apparently attractive though such accountshowever, they are, suffer from two related difficulties,point both to of a which potential tension between citizenshiprights and are rights. universal, First, applying if to allconflict human exists beings, between then being a a possible citizencommunity of and a upholding particular rights. political Justice arguably demandstreat we all human beings with equalthat concern – and if respect, true a – position couldcitizens be with at greater variance regard with to treating everyone one’s fellow global else. citizenship Cosmopolitan possibly or offers a solution,normative yet problems holds of practical its and own –there as is we a shall growing see. consensus Second, around although consensus the linked idea to of a human commitment rights, to a freedom and equality that that follow from what they believerights. to Indeed, be almost people’s all moral countries or have human enshrinedthese at sorts least of some rights of in constitutionalsuperior documents to that ordinary are legislation, deemed thereby allowingcriticize citizens existing to positive rights for failinghuman to or live moral up rights to as their individuals,understood at and least protected in by so the far as relevantthese these constitutional accounts, are court. rights On provide the basisdevelopment for of citizenship, citizenship with policies the being drivenoften by halting, the realization steady, if of these rightsimportantly, in rights ever are fuller offered ways. as More an alternativeof and thinking more about just citizenship way to membershipcommunity. of The a United national States political is often takena as rights-based the national model identity. A of society such ofadherence mass to immigration, the Constitution has oftendefining been what portrayed it as means to beto an the American Constitution citizen. has Yet, appealing also provedterms a of mechanism citizenship for in altering important the ways,movement as of in the the 1960s civil which rights sawthe the terms progressive of expansion American of citizenship tomore include equitable black basis. Americans on a mean that citizens Citizenship fu a epc h ihsntt erpd udrd n oon so and murdered, raped, be to not one rights Each the not. respect is can type us of second of capable the is that right ways of in type universalized first being the that argued sometimes is It way. this in are characterized subsistence often and education, health, to of rights standards Socio-economic minimum need forbearance. the just indicate than rights rather hand, support other for the punished On or process. detained due being a or without tortured, or such assaulted against being rights as civil acts other standard to the do include may rights one we Such the what people. On constrain life. to decent seek a rights live therefore, to hand, secure needed to conditions seek basic should the we all and for being, nobody human that another things to certain do are should concern there of result, degree a a As with respect. treated and be to all entitled that are intuition beings basic human the articulate to taken attempt theories today those seriously differences, many suffices their It despite currency. how, wide note enjoy to longer no different which these of evaluate many to theories, place and the values not moral is of Here variety principles. a with with associated reason, being or sources history these nature, human from to – law rights natural these God-given for given human been fellow have our sources treat Various to beings. ought we how concern rights Human citizenship cosmopolitan and rights Human both explores turn. chapter in this issues of these suppress rest to The right rights. a promote it than making rather thereby interests minorities, own of their expense promote the to at seek majorities could if democracy Yet, rights rights. with have clash to right the – foundation its own offering paradoxically citizenship overcoming with of way disagreements, a such offered in has noted citizenship I democratic As 1, them. Chapter from flow and that values implications exists these policy scope realize the of best deal rights great which a about ideal, disagreement citizenship for the of heart the at lies 80 Rights and the ‘right to have rights’ 81 However, many people contend matters are notFor quite a so start, clear the cut. poverty and poorthe health undeveloped experienced or in developing much world of doesmisfortune, not such arise as simply floods, from droughts, orresults earthquakes. from It the also systematic commercial exploitationaffluent of countries poor and by their direct orregimes. indirect The support globalization of of coercive production andmost exchange citizens means of that the developed worldto cannot some avoid degree being in complicit this exploitationresponsibility or exists benefiting to from help it. the So world’s a poorgoes and beyond oppressed a that duty of humanitarianeven aid. upholding It rights is not also to the be casethan physically that merely coerced refraining requires from more such actions.always Regrettably, there some are individuals prepared to take advantage of others. Just of everyone in the world byBut simply it refraining would from soon such exhaust actions. evenattempt the to richest provide person’s resources succour to for allsome those but in not need, to while others to seems givegenerally arbitrary. to Those recognize who a take humanitarian this duty line towhen aid it those lies in in distress one’s power toMost do people so accept at that little a or wealthy norelief country risk to that to victims failed oneself. of to a provide naturalgood disaster, say, swimmer would who be failed as to culpable go asswimming to a pool. the However, aid they of argue a any drowning fullertype child application of in of right a this arises only whento someone help has particular a special others responsibility – suchlike as my those children; I those have who a I dutyunintentionally may to harmed have protect, intentionally in or some way; orexplicitly those engaged with to whom provide I such have rights,citizens. such From as this my perspective, fellow no tension needrecognizing exist human rights between while acknowledging acitizenship fuller rights set to of fellow members ofSo your long political as community. your country doescountries not and coerce has the some citizens kind of of other then aid it budget has for fulfilled global its emergencies, responsibilities. Citizenship oeetielgclporme,nn fwihi completely is which reasonably of few none a programmes, into ideological preferences coherent their combine to voters able of be groups to for electorate are the there among where commonalities extent sufficient this some 5, to Chapter overcome in be see can shall problem we As voters. rather of millions thousands for than responsible be to democracy need world would of representatives type any express in democracies but already, larger feelings the such of citizens Many they feel. disempowered to more likely the are and the have works, will democracy citizens which influence on less scale the larger the Size and obstacles. matters, considerable faces political citizenship a world for of setting form the provide could that of democracy system global meaningful a creating polity, different cosmopolitan for of forward kinds put been have schemes various Although turn. in as each just explore be We’ll can formidable. citizenship’ ‘legal world a confronting the disadvantages However, citizenship’. ‘political than of rather conception citizenship’ Greek ‘legal the of notion imperial Roman ideal the cosmopolitan with the associate to tended least have at They – explicitly. it propose cosmopolitanism of few advocates very contemporary that problems clear such raises arrangement or citizenship polity world world that a suggests implies term this of or derivation Greek world’ the The of ‘citizen a a literally stoics, is Roman cosmopolitan the with ancient particularly the associated to and back world going a doctrine propose A to cosmopolitanism. been of has form circumstance this to response natural A rights. of sets both uphold to bodies international and need arrangements we transnational, is – – activity crime social including and economic much while other, interact each increasingly be with systems can national which because of And all costly. – as things just system, other legal among a prisons, require and rights force, civil police so on, social so a and schools, system, hospitals, security require rights economic and social as kosmos 82 [world] polis.Yet,suchan kosmopolitai. Rights and the ‘right to have rights’ 83 Diversity of this divisive kind isproblem already within proving most a existing growing states –separatist witness tendency the of growing given cultural groupsdemocracies in as such Canada established and Belgium, wherecitizens a in high the percentage French- of and Flemish-speaking regionshave respectively supported parties seeking to secedeis from likely their to country be – even and moreDespite problematic traditional within liberal the views world that as culture abe and whole. – religion and should would become –for purely politics, personal they issues, have of remained no stubbornly relevance working central of to most the political efficient systems. Someglobalization analysts will contend overcome that this difficulty bycultures homogenizing to a degree, giving everyonecappuccinos, a cola, taste and for McDonald’s. designer But jeans, though thesehave processes diffused good- as well as poor-qualitycosmopolitan products, tastes bringing to far more peoplewould than regard ever the before, replacement few of culturalconsumerism variety as with an mass entirely enticing –part or of likely the – attractiveness prospect. of In a fact, precisely system in of allowing separate different states cultures lies toexistence thrive. of Meanwhile, the alternative regimes also putsstates pressure in on particular despotic to improve theiroffer ways a – possible not place least of because escape they 18th-century for opponents German and philosopher others. Immanuel As Kant, who the most inspires contemporary cosmopolitan thought, acknowledged, because a world state gets rid‘a of universal such despotism’. alternatives, it risks being incompatible with the others. These conditionsfeel allow adequately citizens represented to by one ofentirely the excluded available even parties, if and their not preferredHowever, party where is there in are opposition. deep divisions –or especially cultural of nature an – ethnic then itminorities is will much feel more alienated likely and that may electoral result, even they be will oppressed. seek As as a muchgovernment autonomy control. as possible from central Citizenship o ae,sy reternusaersosbefrete their either for responsible their are for entrepreneurs contracting or ‘freely’ say, are wages, poor low the far how influencing to – as problems judgements social certain free to of regard effects with negative markets or positive will the differences about such arguments instance, For inform whom. been by has and right not, a or when infringed of views conflicting even and produce differing will example, for causality, moral social of or views responsibility Different actually practice. what in about them less from much follows is there but about rights, abstract basic the certain be in may agreement There complete, work. not societies if how considerable, and life about in hold important we is that what beliefs other different and the ideological, of moral, prism cultural, the through we rights First, understand citizenship. to political tend of not downgrading – similar argument its that in with least noted we of those number to a problems into parallel runs it However, we 2. citizenship Chapter legal in of encountered view imperial Roman just the more of a version like rather cosmopolitanism makes account This further to ends. employed cosmopolitan be an must to and subject authority is legal it international units, to local convenient into be authority may political it partition Though rights. social uphold or to civil needed either resources to of given distribution be the to in ought co-nationals preference no and them arbitrary to morally attachments are our and boundaries State stem rights. that human obligations from moral global the by been nonetheless has undermined sovereignty state that argued have neo-Kantian cosmopolitans of number a However, authority. sources political primary of the remain states individual (1950). scheme, Rights Kant’s Human In on Convention European the Rights and Human (1948) of Declaration Universal Nation’s such United charters the rights as particularly – as law justice international of in principles embodied universal certain international by of abide series to a agreements by of themselves system bound a have favour which cosmopolitans states most Kant, like result, a As 84 Rights and the ‘right to have rights’ 85 Second, these disagreements mean that underscheme a of purely cosmopolitan legal citizenship, international courtsto will make have highly controversial normative andwhen empirical deciding judgements if a given individual’s rightsnot. have Of been course, infringed domestic or courts alsoto often make find similarly themselves controversial having decisions. However, theythe do light so of in a large bodyby of the domestic evolving case national law political that culture hasformal been – and shaped including informal the pressures host that of politicians,general the public media, bring and to the bear onstudies the show judiciary that over even time. apparently Indeed, highlydecisions controversial align court well with long-term trendsnational of public sustained, opinion. majority, For the reasons weregarding explored the above difficulty of establishing amuch world harder government, it to is gauge world publicinfluence. opinion Moreover, or greater for diversity it heightens to the exert dangermajority any of tyranny over various minority views. International human rights charters are often deridednot – – whether as fairly the or wish-lists ofovercome unrepresentative such pressure criticism groups. and To command thebe resources effective, they rights need need to to besupport. able After to win all, widespread if political legal decisions are to be complied with, then own profits or the welfare ofcustomers. their Yet, suppliers, all workers, the or parties to thisimportance dispute of may civil agree rights on to the non-interference.who Likewise, are those religious will regard thebelief practices as required generating by rights religious in wayssuch that beliefs those will who not. do However, not both share thenon-religious religious may and believe the in the importanceof of self-expression rights and to of freedom thought –whether they they simply apply disagree in as a to givendiversity case of or the not. globe Given compared the to sizeempirical any and and state, normative these disagreements sorts are of likelygreater to for be any far cosmopolitan arrangement thannational they ones. are for 10. A session of the International Court of Justice Rights and the ‘right to have rights’ 87 I noted when exploring the criteriaparticipating for as membership a how political citizen assumescapacities certain – qualities such and as the ability to learn about and discuss public Citizenship provides the ‘right to havesenses. rights’ First, in as two we important saw incitizen the body last gives chapter, membership access of to the theoffered ‘positive’ by or a ‘institutional’ given rights political community. Second,Chapters as 1 we and remarked 2, in the exercisemeans of for political claiming citizenship rights offers and a shaping theand ways implemented. they Here, are though, conceived I wantwhether to explore this ‘right’ the issues does of not itselffar assume it certain is rights, compatible and with how theare recognition not of co-citizens. the rights of those who The ‘right to have rights’: stateand citizenship global justice We seem faced with a conundrum. Justicelinking appears citizenship to to demand rights within somescheme. form Yet, of a cosmopolitan legal form of rights-basedtoo citizenship controversial risks to being command the legitimacyfor and it support to needed work, while aprovide form it of with political the citizenship necessary that authority might world seems scale. unworkable Is on there a a way, therefore,and of democracy linking at rights, the citizenship, state level,acknowledging while our at cosmopolitan the obligations same to time recognizerights the of citizens in other statesso, or and without I any will state sketch at this all? possibility I in think the next section. people must be able to identifystandard with mechanism them. for Democracy amicably offers settling the differences andat arriving workable compromises to produce legislationas citizens in can some view sense theirs. Unfortunately, aspreconditions we for have such seen, a the system simplyglobal are level. not available at the Citizenship ohwoi iie,adhwctzn a c ihntepolitical form. the and within decisions act its can influence – citizens and citizen how system political and a citizen, be a to is is who it both what altered the have At they life. time, modern same of complexity to and them diversity shaping the and accommodate rights deepening and broadening been have for processes crucial political ongoing These differences. other cultural, and religious, accommodate to rights adjudication of and style legislation the by broadened interference and against others; key rights and certain as governments to well rights as as education, seen as are such rights goods, that so – culture; scope and family, their the refined narrow workplace, the the just also not but – sphere spheres political new as to well them as applied women say; – men, subjects new encompass progressively to has them that extended pressure political further Moreover, activity. been citizenly has of it products all the how been 2 have Chapter rights in these observed also we is all, it After rights, topsy-turvy. pre-political somewhat of argument set the a in presupposes truth citizenship of that element an is there though Therefore, of exercise citizenship. actual democratic the subverting up ends this paradoxically influence, proposal political from immune are protected that legally constitutions in rights these democratic entrenching of by rights Yet, the citizenship. to linked conceivable somehow all being almost as reading rights up end view this of proponents some Indeed, the itself. from citizenship protected democratic be of even operation must and an rights possibly of and bill domestic international a within such, protection As special citizenship. deserve for they preconditions argue be to must is rights kinds these various that of rights practices entail the citizenship that democratic fact of this on. from so stemming and assumption elections, common to regular A right association, a of just freedom not also implies but vote vote a cast basic to to even right Likewise, a education. even possibly speech, and and information, thought of of freedom freedom to rights with involves citizens implicitly providing all for opportunities these secure To issues. 88 11. Martin Luther King before delivering his ‘I have a dream’ speech, 28 August 1963, from the steps of the Lincoln Memorial during the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom, a defining moment of the American civil rights movement Citizenship oite,bcuei novsa mlcteaiainadcollective and egalitarian implicit an involves it homogeneous because culturally societies, in least at majoritarianism progressive, Whereas generally reform. proves seek who latter it the for be underprivileged, will the over naturally privileged will currently tendency the This benefit of change. favour slows in that bias quo a status creates the change legislative said, to That barrier it. the within raising trends and long-term system reflect political to the tend of naturally part are they national, – sustained, opinion from majority deviate rarely courts As above, though. remarked mixed, I is practice these in both occurring for possibilities evidence theoretical The rights. inspire claim can to and movements prejudices, popular or panics or populist convenience to own response their in for either politicians, by from curtailed rights being protect may entrenchment constitutional legislation. course, ordinary Of in enshrined where simply Kingdom, are United rights the such as such countries, in generally than is slower change However, views. and needs social reflecting evolving pressure political to of response process in a reinterpretation undergo to tend they in enshrined documents, are constitutional rights other and political when Even workplace. the at care limited child obtained for slowly, support if the gradually, won and have leave women maternity that to right action such through is them. it affect example, may For remove that to disadvantages as or so discrimination others, unjust of any those and pursuits their or between themselves the existing for differences recognition and mutual similarities obtain relevant to various with seeking terms by equal so on do lives They their others. to meaning goals give the that pursue interests to and freedom social their ways facilitate the structures improve legal to and is strive It citizens courts. that the activities before such cases via new new bringing pass their to by politicians or persuade legislation, to groups acting pressure their or through voters it as be themselves: citizens of the actions through political as redefinition seen of be process to continual have a also undergoing citizenship define that rights the So 90 Rights and the ‘right to have rights’ , Brown failed to alter the material 91 Brown Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka , 163 US 537 (1896) that had deemed the Plessy v. Ferguson 347 US 483 (1954). This casein overturned a previous Court ruling segregation of black and white facilitiesAmerica in to the be southern permissible states so of longby as declaring they that were ‘separate ‘separate educational but facilities equal’ unequal’. are As inherently a result, racial segregation wasviolation now of affirmed the to Equal be Protection a ClauseAmendment of of the the Fourteenth United States Constitution.this Yet, ten ruling years no after more than 1.2%desegregated of schools black in children the attended southern states.occur Change as only a began result to of thecivil political rights actions movement of and the the African-American passageRights by Act Congress and of the the Voting Civil Rights Actmay in have 1964 helped and energize 1965. support forprotest such against measures, racial but discrimination popular would undoubtedlyarisen have anyway. Meanwhile, the Court’s decision alsoshift motivated to a the right by whiteoccasionally southern violent, politicians opposition and to staunch, reform. and Inits any positive case, or whatever negative effects, conditions of most African-Americans. Only gettingpay a for majority extensive to social reforms willwithin tackle the the United racial States. poverty gap Even when constitutional courts seek tounless protect the minority rights groups, concerned enjoy sufficientfrom political citizens recognition for governments to embodypolicy-making, them little in will legislation change. and Take the landmarkthe decision US of Supreme Court in tendency – a point we explorestatus more quo fully bias in leans the towards next the chapterparticularly regressive – so and the with proves respect to socialusually and require economic redistribution rights, from which rich tohistorically poor. For it example, has greatly inhibited bothhealth labour and legislation welfare and programmes in theWestern United Europe. States compared to Citizenship ftectzn fteafce onr rmeecsn hi rights. their exercising from country affected capacity the the of undermine citizens might the that of ways interfering in country another one of of those activities with hand, the other against the guard On to benefit. seek will they countries all of from citizens goods the collective which certain one secure the to On endeavour purpose. they two-fold hand, a serve kinds these of agreements International elected constituents. as their way for same act the representatives much in the countries as their act of governments representatives which in the world, all the than of rather individuals seek states should between they justice is, global that of – terms other each between just interaction establish of to endeavour terms should to states ‘right citizen’s that the implies of rights’ locus have the as state the recognizing First, communities. other of citizens the for it supporting recognizing and entails community political have own to one’s right within the rights as a citizenship in upholding Indeed, respects level. of global number the at at be promotion not their need with states variance within located primarily citizenship as seeing rights that and indicates that bodies fact such very created The have despondent. states be not should of one many advocates, disappoint their to tended have regimes rights the international though Nevertheless, operation. their in largely intergovernmental are Union the European as the such or organizations Nations Even United appeal. can political they world which no to is authority there because states domestic numerous the of influence politics to need still will a movement impact, transnational international real a have to Moreover, interests. commercial powerful representing lobbyists much funded also better are there However, needed. is concerted action where international poverty and environment the such as in areas especially movements, political some and are social there transnational to course, access Of of underprivileged. ease the greater than with them privileged the to they more that incline isolated danger may more the even increasing be influence, to political likely popular are from courts the level, global the At 92 12. A meeting of the Council of the European Union in Brussels Citizenship eiet eeo uhssesfrteronctzn.Moreover, citizens. own their own for their systems by such entailed develop is to that desire states strict all a for as justice seen of be requirement can systems to welfare efforts own their their hamper create and others exploit to not a However, commitment globe. the across comprehensive operating a system for welfare needed citizens among and reciprocity solidarity of deeper sense the alone of Scale development bit. the their against doing of militates and sense others a by additionally fair involves playing others to everyone aid positive offer this to deepening as scheme, so welfare any of part are and anti-discrimination non-exploitation although have chapters, I earlier As in nonetheless. remarked effects redistributive have time cosmopolitans, over some but by the advocated of wealth short of far redistribution fall global measures of sorts their These import to products. latter agricultural protect the to obliging able while be farmers not own should their former the that and example, rich for between poor: equitable of be terms should the countries that between sense trade growing a being is is there progress generally, steady More but made. slow oppressive relief, other debt or to labour practices, child work of exploitation the on bans from of certain up advantages giving their by that long-term those losing than countries up wealthy set involve to easier naturally are the – in sphere abound international which – settlements win-win potential Such costs. the of any paying without reaping advantages thereby environmental emissions, the to their continuing cut by countries example, other for while – pollute others them of of actions one the any on prevent free-riding to designed are long-term and a benefit for common advantages short-term up giving agreements countries of involve sorts These stocks. as fish such depleted activities, over-fishing other regulate or emissions to reduce agreements collectively international involves environment the protect action to Likewise, arrangements. security and collective pacts in non-aggression collaboration by promoted is peace collective of the good So elements. these both involve agreements Many vis-à-vis orrsae.Yt narneo issues, of range a on Yet, states. poorer 94 Rights and the ‘right to have rights’ 95 Finally, states and their citizens have athe global humanitarian obligation rights to of uphold citizens. Into addition supply to aid the in requirement crisis situations,not discussed sustaining above, regimes it that also oppress entails theirobligation citizens. might Potentially, this support humanitarian intervention inof the another affairs state to prevent genocidecitizens. and However, the such mass actions murder must of always be assessed on a case Similar reasoning underpins a second aspectdimension of of the the international right to havecommunities rights: should namely, that be political granted rights toneed self-determination. not This mean that every national,should cultural, have or its ethnic own group state –greatly as outstrips we the saw, the likely number number of of suchthough, viable groups that states. where It a does desire suggest, forshould self-government be is made voiced to efforts devolve powerarrangements or so create long power-sharing as in doingless so viable. an It existing is unit a is sign notsuppress of made such a demands, dictatorial but regime that that they itit are seeks collapses. expressed to For the example, moment such has beencommunist the bloc case of in Central the and former Easternof Europe 1989, in and the in aftermath Iraq post-Saddamimplies Hussein. A that parallel immigrants logic should also not havemembership discriminatory criteria applied to them. Itprospective is citizens certainly should in show order a that degreechosen of country, commitment usually to by their a moderate residencybe requirement, able and to operate as fullinvidious members to of set their the new membership country. But criteriacitizens it higher could is than attain most – existing for example,literacy by in demanding the a dominant standard language of onlyeducated. achieved by the highly this scheme allows for variations inCitizens what can a tailor given welfare state to might suit offer. thedifferent political elements, culture adopting – alternative prioritizing ways of funding,diverse allowing mixes of private and public provision, and so on. Citizenship loe cest ebrhpo o-iciiaoyterms. non-discriminatory on be membership non-citizens to that access requires allowed it hand, other their the dominating On or countries. exploiting by existing themselves in govern citizens to of polities capacity the this undermining hand, not one involves the duty On all. for within communities citizenship political of self-governing exercise the to for citizens possibility their the and states secure on obligation citizenship. an cosmopolitan places or it global Instead, does a this of level, notion state the the negate at not pursued best is exercise citizenship the political purposes, of practical we all that for sense Although, political fuller, rights. a generate in citizen a being it Rather, through propose. is of citizenship concept of whole conceptions the legal exhaust as to citizenship, as such but be rights, not certain need imply these does citizenship to right a summarize: To become country. they host or their remote, in are established origin of safely country their their of to prospects returning the either to when them citizens allow as to naturalize clear and a seekers with asylum states accept presents to also obligation rights have to right prism the the of from through far rights if humanitarian better, Upholding a solution. offer ideal, oppress to ability that regime’s measures a drastic curb less simply Often situation. and worse backfire even often an can produce they shows Experience basis. case by 96 Chapter 5 Participation and democracy

We saw in Chapter 2 how for the ancient Greeks political participation formed an intrinsic part of citizenship. To enjoy the promise of civic equality that the status of citizenship holds out, all citizens had to play their part in the political process. Otherwise, instead of a situation of ruling and being ruled in turn, a citizen would simply be ruled. Indeed, our word ‘idiot’ comes from the Greek idiotes, a term used to describe someone who concentrated entirely on their private affairs to the neglect of the public realm. These days, though, most of us tend to be idiots in this respect.

Disenchantment with democratic politics has never been more pronounced, with voter turnout and trust in politicians in a slow but steady decline within all the established democracies. Political citizenship is rejected as both too demanding and of dubious worth. People increasingly adopt what I called the imperial Roman view of legal citizenship. They place their faith in the courts and other supposedly impartial, expert regulatory bodies to provide an equitable framework for their activities, rejecting politics as at best ineffective, at worst pernicious. I have already cast doubt on some of the assumptions underlying these kinds of arguments at various points throughout this book. This chapter seeks to make the case for linking citizenship and democratic politics in a more systematic fashion. In particular, I want to argue that democratic politics as it is practised in the

97 Citizenship htnihrcpue h dao oiia omnt fequals of community political a of idea out the turns captures It neither alternatives. that these both with section problems first some The out themselves. points than to rather desire people and the ability for the govern have free interest, who, private rulers or prejudice expert from benevolent of class a narrow of the vision or law, account’s the administering and are making all in whereby involved rule, democratic broad participatory the direct either of by account offered democracy ‘ideal’ supposedly superiority the imagined of ‘actual’ the or with ‘real’ comparisons called from be stems might democracy what of criticism the of Much ruled. the by, removable and to, some accountable by, to chosen are degree rulers that means of rule systems democratic democratic whereby existing today, actually the between lie Midway positions beneficial. two and these benevolent was so rule sense their this as in hereditary ‘democratic’ long a be people: would the despots by enlightened or of or from line whether chosen – be people to the happen all they of not benefit rulers the that for suggests rule it simply accounts, should of narrowest the decision On collective consensus. every by taking people relevant the democratic all accounts, involves broadest rule in the read On be terms. also broader can or involves narrower ‘rule’ What however ‘rule’. people, to the said which are in defined, sense and nature the same to the applies Much humanity. of cosmopolitan whole certain the on encompassing broad, accounts very the among to slaves, excluded, and were was women others, as where scope, Greece in ancient narrow in very case be the the can from that – questions ways of various number in a answered begs are 3, ‘people’ Chapter the in who saw, that also We kratos). ( ‘rule’ literally (demos) roots, ‘people’ Greek meaning has terms ‘democracy’ political word the the far, of many so like examined that, noted we 2 Chapter In it. at has direct it to that conventional criticism become and cynicism the like not anything does deserve Canada, or Australia, Zealand, New Germany, Britain, Sweden, States, United the as such democracies, established 98 Participation and democracy 99 At its most extreme, a radicalsynonymous democratic with position anarchism. becomes According almost to thisrule view, people themselves can democratically only if they takeweigh every up decision, all can alternatives, and comeOtherwise, to the a minority unanimous in conclusion. any voterather will than be ruling ruled themselves. by Yet the it majority does not take much thought The 18th-century French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau – the last great advocate of thecitizenship ancient – model famously of declared participatory that the‘free ‘people only of during England’ the were election ofas members they of are parliament. elected, As slavery soon overtakescontemporary it, critics and of it today’s is democracies nothing.’ Many are aptfurther to and go complain even that even whenpeople electing are the not legislature, ruling the – atamong best a they pre-selected are shortlist voting that for offers theirchoice. them rulers I little from shall in explore the the way of accuracydemocratic of elections this below. characterization But of what of the implied alternative? Participatory democracy This section will explore ‘direct’ orwhich ‘participatory’ all democracy, citizens in participate in law-making,where and no guardianship, participation is involved. In pointingboth, out I the hope problems to of highlight therepresentative merits democracy of that the characterize real most systems working of democracies today. What is democracy, and why isfor it citizenship? important that lies at the heart ofaccount citizenship. of I democracy shall that offer is an more alternative exploring in in tune the with second this section idea, howpractices far serve contemporary to democratic realize it. Finally, thechapter third and section the concludes book this as aprospects whole for with political some citizenship reflections in on contemporary the societies. Citizenship oiyqetoscletvl,te ol nyb adt rule to said be only could they all collectively, decide questions to policy is people it for although unnecessary that perhaps be and to impractical said often is referenda issues having constitutional for on rationale The first. the the than supporting convincing reasons more proving proposal reasoning second the the with democracy, underlying direct more for argument of different line slightly a invokes a each from However, in plausible perspective. those more practical or certainly local are very proposals the Both notably workplace. – the closely most us affect and that amendments, those constitutional the as for such methods issues, such key reserve absolutely could we suggested sometimes is It halt. where a level to a grind to would decision government each of would costs It transaction issue. the single raise every deciding and involve debating to in inefficient and everyone time-consuming condition, too unanimity be the simply drop will we it if Even least. the say seem to government remote, participatory direct advanced of in prospects governments the by societies, decided be options to policy need related generally and that issues the of complexity and the number simplifies considerably example my of that degree Given reasonable plausibility. a claim all can which empirical assumptions and different positions reflect moral to incompatible liable occasionally is and highly option is policy also each but that else, given anything unlikely for that time level having a exclude to to the citizen starts raises each only of not expected – commitment them of of degree each of public-spirited merits long, the a of after discussion even – time-consuming unanimity be expect would to them enough, of all on vote To issues. these su,5o h eod ntetid n ntels.Ta gives That last. the on 2 and third, the on 3 4 first second, the the on on canvassed 5 being issue, policies possible Suppose, 3 soil. are foreign there on then, campaign military treaty, a international in an involvement of and terms the hospitals, inheritance on issues: spending main tax, practice. four in involves achieve election to an be that would Imagine result this difficult how see to × 5 × 4 × 2 osbevesta iie ih aeon take might citizen a that views possible 120 = 2 100 13. French campaign posters for the referendum on the European Constitution, 29 May 2005 Citizenship hmsJfesni etr ooeo h rfesadkey and drafters the of one to letters by in Jefferson presciently somewhat Thomas made were criticisms these of Many gain who those advantagefromthemcanholdoutagainstreform. because doing difficult clauses, extremely other proven and has these so change to a wish although However, well horse. might fastest majority the news as and fast army as professional only a travelled to allotted now role the militias provided when America, 18th-century the of reflect assumptions clearly time-bound Constitution US example, the For of change. provisions may many societies of ways effects the perverse or potential clauses the particular anticipate to hard very is Moreover,it underprivileged. the further against merely privileged will the entrenchment advantage danger real anywhere, a met is never there far then so condition given a a enacted, time is the are constitution at citizens situated all fairly unless contrary, and the equitably On entirely to case. reason the sound be no to is this be there believe to But likely reform. is proposed exists any what to may that superior That assume are. can they one as if stay appropriate to seem things are for more than far change because for exists, required what to awarded practice, are In votes established. additional is regular bias a quo’ being ‘status electorate a the then is, of condition), (that two-thirds passed with be – to 50% voters than of more supermajority a common, more or, is unanimity as need changes as if long However, so possible. unnecessary are made amendments be to said These be voters. might present stipulations binding Constitution, effectively US be the will of – example dead for thinks many, one – if voters all, past possibly otherwise and intervals, others, regular by at advanced repeated proposals be reject best to at voice have negative voters a otherwise only options, of possible opportunity the the all both on involve voting to need these would to too up it live expectations, to fully referendum constitutional a for Yet, are ruled are made. they collectively which and by directly ‘rules’ the as long so themselves 102 Participation and democracy 103 Treating democracy as a system of popularpeople sovereignty, rule in themselves, which proves misleading, therefore.directs Moreover, it attention away from, and may evenas undermine, a its fair true decision-making role process amongthis political light, equals. the Seen core in purpose ofwith democracy the can underlying be rationale aligned of directly citizenshipbook given – in namely, this the establishment of awe condition noted of in civic Chapter equity. 1, As citizenship assumes both social relations proponents of the American Constitution, James Madison.Madison As came to appreciate, they pointalso not logical just and to normative practical problems but withsystem seeing of democracy collective as self-rule. a Although athemselves given as people having may collective regard problems thatsolution, require the a degree common to which theycollectivity identify will themselves always as be a limited. Despiteand sharing concerns, certain they values may make divergentassessments empirical as and to moral the advisability ofconduciveness certain to policies the and public their interest. Theyreasonable may but also incompatible have interests equally or commitments.result, As any a collective policy will requirefrom a people, degree with of some give almost and inevitably take than compromising others. more Consequently, almost all involved indecision any will collective be to some degreeof ruled a by country others. may So, agree the we electorate threats need posed a by collective global policy warming. to But tacklereasons for the – a from whole ideological host differences, of toevaluations differing interests of and the scientific evidence –what they precisely may ought disagree to as be to done.any Among government the is package likely of to measures adopt,agree most with people and will others find they some do they disagree not. with So the John increased may agree use and ofsuch Paul sources as of wind alternative power, energy, but John disagreefuel and taxes. Paul Both agree John with and raising Paul mayJohn support rules the Paul on government, the but first measuresecond. and Paul rules John on the Citizenship eeoeeu omnt.Ee o osnu a o be not may consensus so, more Even larger, community. a heterogeneous will within consider than to circumscribed need more they much options be of they range which the over and principles disagree and might areas the of result, more a as As themselves collectivity. identify a so and issues, well-defined and fairly purposes of shared number a have usually or they together, nearby work live they because Moreover, respective concerns. their and reflect arguments likely to more positions are their so adjust and to an others, mutually and to say respond a and have listen can to all opportunity means rationale. group best the their of them smallness gives The that fact equality in political is to it link then their – workplace in the as or such associations people, neighbourhood of group small relatively decisions a local among very making when namely, be – might employed politics more plausibly democratic where of of forms above gave participatory I and proposal direct second the to turn we When turn. this in necessity ruled of being that and accepting ruling – involves basis equal an our on pursue ends and differences collective our a settle as we it whereby regards process democracy fair the of view contrast, citizenship-centred By more privileges. a existing their any threaten against might out that hold changes to individuals allowing for by search solutions the equitable subverts potentially it to Worse, above, would all. example it at my that compromise in – Paul, want and we John what for get ‘undemocratic’ to be somehow we able suggests be it to because ought structures all common such denies for self-rule need of very system the a as concern democracy equal Regarding deserving respect. as and involved those all rules treat these policies ensuring and about is Citizenship promote goods. and public conflicts valuable potential our mediate that collective policies for and need rules a and producing others cooperation, of active freedom their the require by limited both as be freedom can our individuals because regulate precisely to state arises the importance of Its necessity them. the anarchism, to contrast by and, 104 Participation and democracy 105 the people often fails to deliver rule by the people – not least because giving equal weight to all views for offers no guarantee that outcomes will bethe either public equitable interest. or Instead, they serve areor more self-serving likely to prejudices. reflect These ignorant dangers caneither be the corrected objectivity by offered by expertise,provided or by the a impartiality neutral ‘third’ party. Asbe a better off result, not citizens participating will in often instead ruling in themselves specially and selected trusting guardians. Yet eachunderlying of this the proposal claims is suspect. Guardianship What of the other ideal ofdecision-making democracy by canvassed benevolent above, experts? that Advocates of ofargument this contend that rule In these local settings, therefore, participationdemocracy and will direct often support political equalityall because views they to allow be given atake full on and board equal the airing, opinions and and enablenote preferences citizens how of to direct others. involvement By in contrast, aupheld referendum as – a which model is of often ideal,opportunity direct for democracy voters – to gives mutually no modifyequal their respect positions for to the show views ofrequires others. more And, than as a we majority saw, if to thethen be vote those passed, who as favour is change often are thewho treated case, prefer less the equally status than quo. those Ascitizenship such, by it not fails encouraging by participants the to standardequals. view of each other as possible or even desirable given that,simply as be we a saw way above, for it the may prejudicedlegitimate or change. privileged Consequently, a to decision hold may out need against by to majority be vote. made Yet, nobody need feeleach too has excluded had as a a hearing result and – everyone been able else. to vote on the same terms as Citizenship asneshv qa tnig–tewatyaebte positioned better all are not wealthy all, the for – equal standing be equal may have terms passengers the although and place market, takes the companies in their course, and Of captains about. sea come between never competition might – people the those ‘for’ especially specifically – improvements technical Without many in navigation. incentive, and and that want design people ship what both to improve ways process of the leads variety that a passengers in woo respond to to it need them course, the its but charts benevolence captain their a not and is ship the Though build themselves. and than design rather experts will others they of that benefit guarantee the no for is rule there omniscient, and as selfless well unfailingly as be altruistic to experts assume we unless Second, life. of out seek as they see what themselves given they suitable what most from apart best people of all science for no destinations is there who For passengers destination. the its is determine it rightly ship, the sailing of with technicalities deal the may captain the to though according Consequently, parameters norms. of common set closed logically and within empirically operates an reasoning where either mathematics, than or ‘hard’ science less natural far science and social unpredictable make in ways, operate multifarious beings human social that the fact of the openness world, The all beings. in human action all of for course circumstances appropriate most the certainty of with incapable defining proven and has contentious reasoning often Human to judgements. subject fallible are Both best them. the realize of to necessarily means or the pursue, either should of governments science ‘objective’ that no ends a is at there down First, breaks places. analogy of art this number the that learned is difficulty had The and for governing. capacity of the had who a those a likewise for for was matter job government a reasoned, was he rocks so, the professional, on trained pieces the to keeping dashed and being seas from rough to ship and it tides entrusting handling than as rather Just passengers captain. the a to ship a handing of to running analogous the was democracy with that originated maintained expertise He of Plato. objectivity the on based argument The 106 Participation and democracy 107 A key difficulty with this proposalarbitrator is exists. whether Judges such are an often impartial portrayed in this guise, and in Plato’s case for ‘objective’ rule by expertsfoundations, rests therefore. on It dubious fails to displacethe the best democratic guide case we that have thatthe social public and interest political is decisions that will they bechoices reflect in of the citizens expressed under and conditions evolving ofrulers political are equality, and accountable that to them forargument their also actions. has The Greek impartiality roots butThe takes claim a here slightly is different tack. that citizensconcerns are and likely so to fail be to partial accord toof equal their others. concern own As and a respect result, to we those ensure may all need views an are impartial considered arbitrator fairly. to Thatguarantee need the not right be decision a is reached,result but from at bias least or it prejudice. will not than the poor. Yet, those issues thatregardless should of be wealth, the such same as for basic all sea-worthiness matters of relating the to vessel, the the qualificationson, of arise captains, from and state so legislation thatsubstantive responds equality to provided the by more democratic voting.are Again, technical these issues, and politicians willadvice necessarily of draw a on whole the range oflegislation expert on advice such when matters. formulating But governmentsaccount take because them citizens into have pressurized themdisasters to and respond the to like sea by imposingthe a shipping basic industry regulatory that structure reflects on mattersmarket of competition public alone interest would that be unlikelybasis to for secure all. on Meanwhile, an most equal technical solutionsproblematic will empirical raise and moral issues thatdisagree even upon. experts For may example, there will bebetween a safety balance and to various be costs of made so time, on. the Again, price the of most a appropriate ticket,will judges and be of those the likely risks to involved bearagainst them their and other in concerns a and position interests to – weigh namely, them citizens. Citizenship eiinmkn rcs fesn urne httedecision the that guarantee no offers the process in decision-making weighting weight equal much course, as Of given else’s. view anybody their as have to each entitled recognizes equally vote’ as one citizen person, ‘One process dispute. impartial the an resolving is for instance this in provides democracy What vote them. males for white women all black that all not and is them It against policies population. these the of of views rest their the in as divided as are and – groups respectively minority of women – view affected personal most a those have Meanwhile, they matter. that the in as citizen are other judges issues, every of as sorts partisan these On pattern. this elsewhere, to and conform of States areas United key the two in cite decision-making to judicial abortion, or issues action that affirmative unclear as is such It groups. main the force between that power-sharing mechanisms democratic through Ireland, accommodated Northern be in can as which, cases minority. special Catholic are the these to However, respect with position own their boosted consistently majority in Protestant past the the where in Ireland, occurred Northern the as at group, privileges ethnic own another its of boost expense to votes group is ethnic phenomenon an in this when stake of at example are commonest interests The and decision. rights the who whose majority that the to when identical cases is in decide be occur to to said likely be is could This is majority tyrannous. it a Yet, when majority. carefully the specify of to tyranny the necessary of is here fear are The electorate overdrawn. the among partiality of dangers the Moreover, case. given a by raised range issues complete empirical the and of moral extent consideration of the full to a advantage giving an forecloses than it rather that hindrance – a law be of may points this Of by yet else. constrained anyone is as reasoning disagreements declared any their to course, party a much as are citizens, they all affecting decisions collective deciding when However, couples. separating between when disputes example, domestic for adjudicating – be can they circumstances certain 108 Participation and democracy 109 Strictly speaking, a system of majoritydecisions rule according involves to making one person, one vote and going with those The political systems of those countriesnot we be call more democracies different could from thedemocracy, model though of they direct, increasingly participatory involve many elementssupposed of democratic guardianship. Their main democratic features lie in offering regular electionsselect in between which the all representatives adults of can competingform parties of by majority some vote. All theseproponents elements of have the been two criticized democratic by idealssection explored for in either the failing last to engageprocess, citizens or fully encouraging in populism the and democratic panderingcommon to denominator. the But lowest each of them makescontribution an towards important securing political equality betweenin citizens ways that are appropriate toparticular, contemporary they conditions. promote In the three qualitiesalternatives we lacked: saw these first, two equity in thedecisions; formulation second, of the collective accountability of rulersincentives to for the them ruled to and pursue theown; public’s interest and rather third, their impartiality in the resolving of disagreements. Citizenship and democracy today itself will be one that treatsthe all very with fact equal that concern majorities and usually respect.winning have Yet the to support be of constructed millions by offinding citizens, themselves with in most a citizens minority onothers, some creates issues an and egalitarian a bias majority within on everyone democracy. Because is involved in making allon decisions, the there part is of an citizens incentive toothers give for equal fear consideration that to they the will viewsreaders not of may receive feel it this themselves. is Many ademocratic somewhat process. idealized In view the of next the section,how therefore, many I features want of to existing show democraticpromote systems this actually result. Citizenship fte a nqeypeerdoe l others. all none over that preferred find uniquely would was we them option, of each other of every ranking of people’s that compared against we option if that be preferred. well highly may most it the Worse, as options different identify so and ways different in preferences people’s proportional aggregate of representation forms different the the However, in UK. adopted and mechanism USA post, the past first votes plurality, weighing the for than mechanism systems equitable These more highest. a rank offer people certainly most that one options available the the select all and among at preferences look their systems rank PR voters options. how two when than own more their offered of are difficulties electors into run but to problem seek this (PR) overcome representation proportional of forms various The occurred. reverse the 1974, margin, of narrower election a first by the when, and 1929 in and more seats, gained parliamentary Conservatives Labour the when but 1951, votes in more – polled Britain has in this times far three so only but although happened – runner-up, countries the both than in votes occurrence fewer frequent also a – than cast fewer votes attracting of only 50% not party winning the with and consistent systems an plurality win are to these constituencies speaking, Technically legislative the election. of majority than a votes in more attract other only any need party a an whereby use system States electoral United the of and system Britain genuine Notoriously, a rule. majority employ democracies all not start, a For problems. possible of number a equal are views there all Nevertheless, accords respect. it favour, consequence, in In 51% passes. and decision against the 49% then to move motion views people’s a the against if 60% that from so opinion, It in else’s. shifts everyone or reflects as believe also same you the what exactly or counts are judgement you your who why, matter not does neutral it and – anonymous manner an in views people’s all benefit treating the of has the arrangement From this cast. equality, votes political the of of perspective 50% than more receive that options 110 Participation and democracy Alice in Wind Energy 30 Voters 111 Wind Energy Nuclear Power Wind EnergyCoal Nuclear Energy Coal Nuclear Power Coal 40 Voters 30 Voters Fortunately, though logically possible, these sorts ofturn dilemmas out to be rare infrom practice. the One role reason of for parties. this Parties raritypreferences bring stems together on a people’s different whole range ofuniting issues them into within a an single overall programme, ideologicalspectrum framework that along in a most democracies goessimplifies from the left actual to choice right. voters That havemore to like make a to decision something between twomulti-party alternatives. system, Even within they a are generally choosingcontinuum along of a left to right. Inelections, competing parties for have people’s votes an during incentive to build, or in a multi-party As we can see, 70 voterswhile prefer 70 nuclear voters power prefer to wind wind energy energy, coal to to coal, nuclear but energy. 60 So voters no prefer singleover option all is others. uniquely This preferred phenomenon iswas known first as identified a by voting the cycle Marquis and ofcentury, and Condorcet then in rediscovered the by 18th Charles Dodgsonmathematician – better the known as Lewis Carol,.Wonderland the In author the of event of such cycles,more selecting preferred any than option any as other seemsfunction arbitrary. It of will the be voting a system andmanipulate the it. ways politicians Take the following simple example of 100three voters sources choosing of which generating of electricity to support: Citizenship ugmnso h lcoae fcus,uatcptdise and issues unanticipated course, the Of to electorate. accountability the their of for judgements essential media fact by in grounds is Burkean it on commentators, criticized often to is representatives block their on force vote to parties of tendency the commitments. Though electoral their to faithful remarkably parties remain he contemporary However, if opinion’. you, your serving to of it instead sacrifices betrays, he only, and industry judgement; his his not but you, owes of representative electors ‘your the that informed Bristol he when Burke Edmund statesman philosopher English and 18th-century the was by view expressed This famously guardianship. most of form electoral it an essence, to In policy. amounted influencing betters for intellectual mechanism or a social than their rather among from rulers selected able electorate most the the whereby was means process the electoral as the characterized parties, often of Indeed, development please. full they the as to do prior to free are that representatives is elected others once and Rousseau by of voiced critique government participatory representative the of aspect An pledges. their electoral to representatives keeps discipline party Meanwhile, too. are concern but equal respected, shown equally be only to not likely are views orderings. voters’ preference result, favoured a most As their with align they preoccupations that and so views citizens’ of millions of mutual accommodation the coordinating essentially are policy parties attractive packages, electorally most In the settings. discussing small and in formulating deliberation electoral of effect, results In the maximize choice. mirror to voter campaigns seeking reflect parties they of which result to the degree actually the is to it out – turns case opposite the the However, be choice. a voters give for to criticized failing mistakenly sometimes is two convergence the That between extremes. mid-point whose the voter at the are is, rankings that preference – voter by median result the this on most achieve converging people’s They reflect issues. will different that on policies ranking develop of preferred and package try a they of So part coalition. form winning or a of, part be to system 112 Participation and democracy 113 These effects are all good newsreasonably for low citizens. input At from the them, small they costaddress can of their get a interests governments and to views invoting ways system that – treat with them a – high viaThey degree the can of remove equal unresponsive concern or and incompetent respect. arrive politicians at and collective decisions in anundeniable impartial that manner. Yet, disaffection it for is the workingsnever of been democracy higher. has Why has this dissatisfactiondoes arisen, it and tell what us about the nature of citizenship today? Moreover, politicians no more do ‘anything’ forentrepreneurs power pursue than profit most at all costs.and In their particular, politicians parties remain remarkably faithfulideology. to Even their when ‘brand’ stealing or the opposition’s policiesbenefit – to itself voters a in that itacross reflects the the party need divide to – build they coalitions consistent attempt with to an do evolving so ideological in identity. ways Politicalproves that cynicism much are rarer than journalists tend to make out. Somewhat oddly from a democratic perspective,of this politicians attentiveness to the views ofas the revealing electorate how is they occasionally criticized will dois anything as for nonsensical power. Yet as that attacking criticism commercialthe firms wishes for of pandering customers to simply toexploit make the a entrepreneur’s profit. desire Just for as a markets profitadvantage to by the using customers’ competition to promptlower them costs to so innovate as and to maintaindemocratic or systems increase employ their electoral market competition share, for so voters the by benefit of harnessing the desire offear politicians of for losing power it and to their makeevolving them views responsive of to the policy ruled. failures and the circumstances arise that call for changesprogramme, in but the these legislative tend to beby made the within last the election framework or, set more frequentlythe perhaps, next. in anticipation of Citizenship 4 aakOaacmagigt eteDmcai Party’s Democratic the be to campaigning Obama Barack 14. ot swl stebnfis hthlsa uhfrparticipating for much as holds That benefits. the the as share well they as which costs in equal enterprise as collective other a each within see partners to need and solidarity They of citizens. degree between a reciprocity involves citizenship seen, have we As citizenship? of end The rsdnilcniae 2008 candidate, presidential 114 Participation and democracy 115 One group, characterized by the economistaffluent J. K. ‘contented majority’, Galbraith have as become the more ambivalentelectoral about politics as they have growncontribute increasingly to unwilling collective to goods from whichindirectly. they They may seek only a benefit more direct correlation,enjoyed akin by to customers that in the market,what between they what get they as pay individuals. and Inaccept consequence, a they gradual are privatization inclined of to manysuch hitherto as public health, services, education, and evenundermines the civic police. attitudes Privatization not so muchproviding through public private goods suppliers and services, whichproduce in gains certain in cases terms may of efficiencyprovider, compared as to when a such state-run goods become perceivedconsumables as rather private than a collective responsibility, thatright ought to by be supplied to allhas citizens private on health an insurance equitable and basis. does If not a use family the public education Voting within modern democratic systems is sometimesand portrayed criticized for being self-interested. Indeed,behind this fears view of often tyrannous lies majorities. Asthough, I the noted self-interested in voter Chapter would 1, behome. more The inclined probability to that stay any at onedifference person’s vote is would so make small, a that thealmost costs certainly of time outweigh any and expected inconvenience will benefit.individuals To vote, must feel it is importantthe to public express arena, their and views that within theirwith voice the connects voices in of various millions ways ofisolated others, vote so that that they it are is casting. notcertain For just rather groups an different of reasons, people have started abandoning this civic duty. in elections as paying taxes. For variousseem reasons, to such be sentiments on the decline.related Two broad manifestations and, of in this certain phenomenon respects, standof out: a the more growth consumer-orientated attitude towardsgovernment, the and state the and fragmentation and attenuationcommunity. of political Citizenship ertral ocnrtdmnrt ain n tncgop have groups ethnic and existing, nations already minority contrast, concentrated By territorially state. host the of even that or for, with, discard merge to second- come most immigrants that third-generation culture and a preserve to to not enclaves elements, political discriminatory create its removing of by culture state political host the the broaden to been has vast immigrants the of of majority aim The non-discrimination. of community policies political through wider the large within and inclusion by seek how immigrants 3 Chapter in saw we from However, resulting immigration. multiculturalism on focus to the tends in Attention media problem. parallel a poses fragmentation Cultural poor. the of votes the attracting without they voters strategy, affluent traditional losing that risk adopt they if at Yet, aiming good. movements collective principled the and inclusive as role departing their cynically from for issue criticism single attract like they ape more groups, to become campaigning seek and they electorate If the result. in a changes as the dilemma a in caught Parties themselves participation. find of levels organizing lower in comparatively difficulties and includes politically poor the of Meanwhile, exclusion cooperation. social social the fellow of as system than shared rather a contained within be citizens to see problem to a tempted as former latter the the gradually with have worlds, groups different two inhabit These to years. come 30 past the rich over between poor gap and growing of the fragmentation by the produced of communities aspect modern more one the to of connected activity is political citizens and affluent attitudes social the in shift This for taxes. pay higher to through unprepared improvements are the but services, with public privileges particular and to rights regard consumer seek They parties. by representation offered encompassing more the a deserting on issue, focused single often groups, pressure and campaigns towards narrower gravitate They form. a privatized takes more activity correspondingly political group’s at This provision others. their for support expense to public inclined less be will they system, 116 Participation and democracy 117 As a result, consistent minorities arepeople likely who to are be in rare a – minority thatanti-abortionist on is, may every be issue in they a care minority about.the on The majority that on issue, affirmative but action, could say. be Ofcare in course, the the most issue about they may bethe the ‘intensity’ one of they that are situation in is agetting likely minority their to on, way be but on mitigated many by other their balancing (for occurs them) lesser as issues. much Such within aspredominantly between two-party parties systems. – The especially resulting in needto for compromise everyone is often misguidedly denigratedHowever, as it unprincipled. is precisely this need thatmutual produces recognition toleration between and citizens, enabling allequals to and be to seen some as degree bemajority. included Even within when any one’s winning most favoured party is in opposition, at What the growing divide between richsplit and between poor, and minority the nations cultural or ethnicitiesnational and political the culture, majority share in commondeveloping is segmental that or both vertical represent divisions withinsocieties. contemporary Democracy works best when theamong main the disagreements population are cross-cutting orthese horizontal cases, divisions. politically In important divisions crossSo over there each will other. be socialists amongthe the poor, rich there and will conservatives be among poor andabortion, rich and Catholics poor who and oppose rich peoplebe who men are and pro-choice, women there who will favourin and both oppose affirmative cases action, some and will bepoor black and and those others pro- white, and with anti-abortion rich on and each side, and so on. become ever more vocal in theirautonomy, demands especially for when greater accompanied political by religious and linguistic differences from the dominant nationaldemands group. have These led to the asymmetricterritories devolution controlled of by power given to minorities, those suchand as Northern Wales, Scotland, Ireland in Britain, orCatalonia Quebec and in the Canada, Basque and region in in Spain. Citizenship olbrtv ragmns entdi hpe o this how 4 Chapter in noted from We defect arrangements. to collaborative ability enhanced the to and pressures mobility market greater global by weakened similarly are political cultures National action. increasing political goods, privatized collective and deliver consumerist to able less and weaker become States community. political dissipated further has Globalization alone. providers service private on rely to seek public and the sector to contributing from gated withdraw own They their communities. into secede community likewise political former broader the the the that from with is parallel poor The and taken. rich be between can divide strategy this limits far be how always to will as there so minorities, contain cultural will significant states some of majority vast be the may Yet solution separation. only complete the then If entrenched, not. too or become effective divisions government in that involved be is coalition, group one’s governing which the to people extent the the how just of governed, issue are the reflect barely now for elections Belgium, example, In at responsiveness. be democratic can of but expense degree the a to danger this groups. overcome two may the Power-sharing between separation the is of oppression because minority greater of danger the for Here influence group. obtain cultural to one’s is purpose of main choices its policy because the governments influences rarely voting cases, such In divide. linguistic and predominance cultural the the by of mitigated is collaboration their but socialist parties, and conservative example, French-speaking for and Belgium, Flemish- In are it. there to subordinated be all will and issues nationality other or religion, ethnicity, be the will exist, identity may prime issues cross-cutting many Although harder achieve. is to inclusiveness such predominate, divisions vertical When one’s party. than preferred them own by the better by promoted adopted possibly be and party, to governing likely are preferences one’s of some least 118 15. The Flemish nationalist group Voorpost carrying a symbolic coffin of Belgium Citizenship h U hr a entd thspoe mosbet raea create to impossible proved in has used genuine it extensively noted) being we as (as well where as EU, USA, the the and UK the as such systems, democratic well-established within to democracy alternatives, electoral even and been supplements, have as These deployed guardianship. increasingly expert of citizens’ forms as various such and groups, juries, focus or interests affected selected or among referenda more through are either solutions democracy, canvassed of most forms the participatory of Two done? be to is What action. legal and politics group privatized pressure more of the routes effect great to exploited though have politics, groups domestic privileged in than faster even falling is and elections lower EU in Participation culture. political a European creating without communities political forces national the weakening fostered has policy market. this economically, European-wide beneficial a While promote to order in services and labour, EU’s the d’être Meanwhile, presence. electoral no parliamentary with mere factions parties European with subnational citizens, and of national allegiances the in based political EU’s firmly The remains realized. organization from far seem hopes reveals, such world, though, the in most community the political transnational doubt without developed Union, European the As to rights. commitment human a through divisions political cultural, and overcomes socio-economic, that culture post-national the a see for who potential cosmopolitans, by welcomed been has development ti hog oslaineecssvadlbrtv uisaoga among juries deliberative matters, via such exercises in consultation all through at is say it any have citizens that extent the To reactors nuclear tribunals. of judicial location by the about disputes of commissions, arbitration special bank, the by central or wage a minimum of the governor of the by determination rates the interest of setting the – it regulators be semi-independent and unelected onto increasingly devolved have been countries these in administration elected the a ent nac h remvmn fcptl goods, capital, of movement free the enhance to been has demos rprydmcay ak ihroudrae by undertaken hitherto Tasks democracy. party or 120 raison Participation and democracy 121 Attempts to rebuild a commitment tothrough political citizenship participation education represent a moreresponse, promising although as we saw inproblems Chapter of 3, their they own. are By not and without or large, disengagement patterns are of created civic at engagement anthat early voting age. or Studies not have voting shown ineligible the is very a first good election guide for to whichlater one’s one likely life. is participation So, or the lack more of young itinterested people in in can democratic be politics informed prior about to and vote, their the first better. opportunity Civic to engagement is alsoattempts likely to to devolve be power improved to by morevalues local and communities. common Shared purposes are likelysettings, to and be with stronger them in the such willingnessprogrammes. to engage in collective representative sample of the public, thecampaigning involvement groups; of or local and, veryreferenda. occasionally, national However, we saw that these devicesof are the more problem part than its solution,idea for of each a works condition against of the civicof equality citizenship. which Deference is to the expertise defining suggests feature one that that the citizens issue are is either incompetentexpress or an untrustworthy opinion to on, or thatmatter is of somehow how beyond things politics are. – Either a it way, such is moves somehow suggest unnecessary that and evenseek illegitimate to for engage citizens with to each othermatters as of equals collective in concern. deliberating As about such,disenchantment it with reinforces and the withdrawal from politicsto as reach a agreement civic on duty the publicconsultation good. exercises That with is selected not citizens helped and by saw, groups. these For, likewise as do we not encourage citizensrespond to to accommodate the and needs and viewspolicies. of On others the when contrary, framing they collective allow citizenspursue to purely employ private politics concerns to or voiceany personal requirement beliefs to without take account ofcitizens. the opinions of their fellow Citizenship h asw ra tesadaetetdb hm tsad behind stands It them. by treated are and process others the treat in we affecting ways self-worth, the of morality. sense social whole our our of underlies features It central to effect Citizenship gives one. and in powerful informs share a who remains equals life civic collective of their society fashioning a of appeal the all, Above parties. political competing on based system democracy a namely, representative politics: of democratic of most form the viable remains and what appealing for context suitable also highly a They remain societies. complex and globalized cultural today’s and of social, problems economic, the tackle to increasingly cooperation, and through alone both capacity, their incoherent. retain or states implausible Nation either having citizenship as of or ideal remedy the beyond rendered being as seen, regarded have be we can as none However, responsibility. some share structures. all political doubt and No politicians or globalization, social as themselves, such citizens forces, on citizenship current political the active blame in they decline whether to as divide to tend Commentators processes. economic global regulate have to they EU, collectively the able as been such bodies regional Moreover, in spending. cooperation social through and welfare of levels high their traditionally to commitment a and retaining environment while economic successfully, global compete new this to adapt for to possible states entirely remains the it of shows, example countries the Scandinavian As exaggerated. be to appear arguments such Yet, transnationally. exchange by and control production state organizing outside operate be can to companies said when forces inevitable market of dominance the with this development, for blamed of often basis is the Globalization on equality. solutions political public for search a to the commitment erodes remove that arrangements to wealthy collective the from for themselves capacity the is than it more else seen, anything have we widening As inequality. of economic that and probably social is grasp to nettle biggest the However, 122 Participation and democracy 123 the commitment to rights and thediversity appreciation that of are cultural among the central moral20th achievements and of early the 21st late centuries. Itdetach has these become effects fashionable of to citizenship try from and or any democracy. involvement What in I politics hope to haveis shown not in possible. this Citizenship book and is democratic thattogether. politics To that stand seek and to fall divorce the twopossibility undermines of not political just citizenship, the but thethe values very associated with idea of citizenship itself.therefore, The depends reinvigoration on of revitalizing citizenship, rather thanpolitical diminishing participation and with it thecommitment sense to of rights belonging that and are the its prime benefits. Further reading

General reading

There are several general books and collections of essays available for those who want to explore the themes of this book further. Most of them combine some treatment of the history of citizenship with a discussion of contemporary issues.

P. B. Clarke, Citizenship (Pluto Press, 1994) and H. R. van Gunsteren, A Theory of Citizenship: Organising Plurality in Contemporary Democracies (Westview, 1998) attempt respectively to update the Greek and Roman accounts of citizenship outlined in Chapter 2.

J. M. Barbalet, Citizenship: Rights, Struggle and Class Inequality (Open University Press, 1988); T. Janoski, Citizenship and Civil Society (Cambridge University Press, 1998); and B. Turner, Citizenship and Capitalism: The Debate over Reformism (Unwin Hyman, 1986) develop in different ways the sociological themes also discussed in Chapter 2.

Two useful collections of essays covering the whole field are R. Beiner (ed.), Theorizing Citizenship (SUNY Press, 1995), and E.F.IsinandB.S.Turner,Handbook of Citizenship Studies (Sage, 2003).

124 Further reading Political Theorizing Sociology,21(1987), (Polity, 1989), chapter (Edinburgh University (Cambridge University Press, (Palgrave, 2004) explores the (Polity, 1998) covers much the (Oxford University Press, 1999) 125 Citizenship: The History of an Idea (Cambridge University Press, Critical Citizens (SUNY Press, 1995), pp. 29–52. M. Walzer’s A Brief History of Citizenship What Is Citizenship? Political Theory and the Modern State 7 offers a defence. R. Bellamy, D.Lineages Castiglione, of and European E. Citizenship: Santoro Rights, (eds), Belonging and Citizenship in Eleven Nation-States development of citizenship in Europe, withUnited a States chapter for on comparative the purposes, a topic dealt with at book Press, 2004) and P. Magnette, (ECPR Press, 2005) both offer accessible historiesM. of Mann, ‘Ruling the Strategies concept. and Citizenship’, pp. 339–54 is an influential critiqueHeld, of T. H. Marshall, while D. The essay by J. G. A. Pocock,Classical ‘The Times’, can Ideal be of found Citizenship in since R. Beiner (ed.), D. Heater, Chapter 2 Citizenship Innovation and Conceptual Change 1989), pp. 211–19. T. H. Marshall’s classicCitizenship essay and was Social published Class as 1950). ‘Citizenship’ appears in T. Ball, J. Farr, and R. L. Hanson, D. Heater, same themes but offers in many respectspolitical, account a of contrasting, less citizenship to theP. one Norris presented (ed.), in this book. The general books mentioned above alldiscussed address here the and issues attempt to comecitizenship up suited with to a modern definition conditions. of Chapter 1 provides a useful collection of essayspolitical on participation changing in patterns of the world’s main democracies. Citizenship urntoa Citizenship Supranational Dannreuther, R. and Citizenship Hutchings Cosmopolitan K. in found be can argument, Europe’, International of Future the on National Reflections and Some ‘Citizenship Identity: Habermas, J. by context essay European influential a an in in articulated was global rights of on form based cosmopolitan citizenship post-national, a develop to need The 4 Chapter Kymlicka, in W. discussed are diversity ethnic and Multiculturalism Citizenship and Gender Lister, R. Perspectives in Feminist discussed is body membership women’s citizenship of the impact of The 2. historical Chapter the in of listed theme accounts central a form membership, exclusion of and issues inclusion, indicates, book Shklar’s of subtitle the As 3 Chapter Inclusion Shklar, N. J. in length CmrdeUiest rs,2004). Press, University (Cambridge Benhabib, S. Belonging of Politics the and Globalisation Davidson, A. and Castles S. Migration Transnational in Rights and Bauböck, is R. seekers in asylum explored and refugees, immigrants, by posed link Identity Miller, National D. and in explored is citizenship and nationality Societies (eds), Norman W. and Kymlicka W. and Ofr nvriyPes 00.Teln between link The 2000). Press, University (Oxford HradUiest rs,1998). Press, University (Harvard h ihso tes les eiet n Citizens and Residents Aliens, Others: of Rights The 2(92,p.19 eae atyisie yhis by inspired partly debate, A 1–9. pp. (1992), 12 , utclua Citizenship Multicultural n d.(agae 03 n .Siim, B. and 2003) (Palgrave, edn. 2nd , mrcnCtznhp h us for Quest The Citizenship: American Plt,20) hl h hleg othis to challenge the while 2000), (Polity, CmrdeUiest rs,2000). Press, University (Cambridge rnntoa iiesi:Membership Citizenship: Transnational Mciln 99.L Dobson, L. 1999). (Macmillan, Mnhse nvriyPes 2006) Press, University (Manchester iiesi n Migration: and Citizenship 126 CaednPes 1995), Press, (Clarendon Ewr la,1994); Elgar, (Edward iiesi nDiverse in Citizenship Plrv,20) and 2000); (Palgrave, Citizenship: Citizenship Praxis Further reading (Polity, Law and Democratic (Manchester (Cambridge University Political Theory and (Yale University Press, 1989) (Cambridge University Press, 127 Freedom’s Law: The Moral Reading (Oxford University Press, 1996). Democratic Challenges, Democratic , 2nd edn. (Princeton University Press, World Citizenship: Cosmopolitan Thinking Democracy and the Global Order Global Justice: Defending Cosmopolitanism (Continuum, 2002). The cosmopolitan ideal (Oxford University Press, 1999) and R. Bellamy, Democracy, 2nd edn. (Palgrave, 2007) offer (Oxford University Press, 2004) explore participation Democracy and Its Critics R. Dahl, Chapter 5 of the American Constitution 2007). Rights-based citizenship at the domestic level,the and constitutional the entrenchment need of for rights, isin most the ably writings defended of R. Dworkin, offers a parallel rights-based argument that isdevelopments also in the inspired EU. by An accessible overviewprovided of by these D. debates Heater, is and Its Opponents more generally is defended in C.International Beitz, Relations 1999) and C. Jones, (Oxford University Press, 1999). His ideas are subjected to criticismDisagreement in J. Waldron, Political Constitutionalism: A Republican Defence of the Constitutionality of Democracy 1995) defends cosmopolitan democracy, while A. Weale, Democratic Citizenship in the European Union worldwide. D. Held, Choices: The Erosion of Support in AdvancedDemocracies Industrial excellent overviews of various arguments fordemocracy, and highlighting against its significance for citizenship asfor a securing means political equality. C. Pattie, P.Citizenship Seyd, in and Britain: P. Whiteley, Values, Participation and Democracy (Cambridge University Press, 2004) looks at changingpolitical patterns participation of in the UK, while P. Norris, and A. Weale, Phoenix: Reinventing Political Activism Press, 2002) and R. Dalton, Citizenship xetadcue ftecretdsnaeetwt politics. with disengagement current the of causes and extent Hay, C. 2006). Context Transnational a in Inclusion Civic Citizens: Shaw, J. and does Castiglione, as D. applies, Bellamy, currently R. it which in context the transnational in only citizenship democratic at looks 2006) Press, University h eHt Politics Hate We Why 128 Plt,20)epoe the explores 2007) (Polity, aigEuropean Making (Palgrave, democracy 1–3 99–105 see also Index elections; voting and right to vote accountability of rulers 109, 112–13 equal legal status 39–40 gender 66–7 guardianship 105–9, 112, 120–1 A ideal democracy 98 Aristotle 29, 31–4, 39 legal and political citizenship 1–12, 42–5 asylum seekers 11, 13, 76, 96 local democracy 61–2, 95, 104–5 attitudes to citizenship 3–4, majority rule 8–9, 109–11 22–3, 97–8, 113–23 membership and belonging 1, 12–13, 25 political parties, role of 111–13, B 117–18 belonging see membership and property ownership 56–7 belonging referenda 100, 102–3, 105, 120–1 British citizenship, rights of 78 rights13–15,87–8 Burke, Edmund 112 dependency, persons in state of 59–60 developing world 81–2, 94 C devolution74,117,121 discrimination 35, 54, 73–4, 76, ceremonies 73–4 90, 95, 116 children 59–60 diversity 71–2, 83, 85, 123 Cicero 36–7 class 35–7, 47–8 collective interests 3, 12–15, 19, E 103–4, 109 components of citizenship 12–17, education 25, 121 25 elections 3, 22, 24, 64–5, 112–13, constitutional documents, 120 see also voting and entrenchment of rights right to vote in 90–1 empirical theories of citizenship cosmopolitan citizenship 82–7, 27, 28–9 96, 120 environment 61, 62–3, 94 criminals, disenfranchisement of equality 7, 11–17, 22–3, 29, 34–5, 64 38–42, 47–9, 66, 82, culture 13, 25, 73, 116–19 121–3 ethnicity and nationality 54, 69–75, 120 D discrimination 73–4, 77, 91 Greek model 31, 35 definition of citizenship 12–17, human rights 74–5 32 language 70–1, 74, 117, 118

129 Citizenship re oe 28–35 model Greek 122 23–4, 2, globalization 83, 50–1, 23–4, 2, justice 90 global 75, 65–9, 54, 35, 31, gender poor, and rich between gap 115 JK Galbraith, G 40–2 law fundamental of Rights of Declaration French 18 13, 11, free-riders 59 contract of freedom 65–9 critique feminist F democracy guardianship, expert citizenship from exclusions 120 51, 24, Union European prsinadrpeso 35 repression and oppression 32, service military and service jury gender,raceandclass31,35 98 31, exclusions 34–5 equality 31 citizenship for eligibility 54 35, discrimination 98 97, 34, democracy 55 36, 32–3, duties civic 54 31–3, 29, Athens 75 to attitudes women, 118 majority the of tyranny 117 73–4, rights self-government 70–1 reciprocity 118 identity primary 74 systems legal parallel 54, 24–5, 13, 2, multiculturalism 2 46 1–9 122 118–19, 94–6, 92, 122 116–18, in growth 42–3 1789 Man 120–1 112, 105–9, and 98 52–75, 31, 20, 12–13, 33 116 77, 69–75, 130 ua ihs5,79–7 51, rights human 41–2 Thomas Hobbes, of constructions law, higher H and democracy guardianship, at maul83–4 Immanuel Kant, K 102–3 Thomas Jefferson, J 92 87, 85–7, courts international 95, 76–7, 24–5, 13, immigration I 95–6 81, aid humanitarian nvraiain80–1 universalization 85 the of tyranny majority, 85–7 courts international world developing of exploitation 74–5 nationality and ethnicity 96, 82–7, citizenship cosmopolitan international and charters pra2,33 29, Sparta 33–4 states small from differences model, Roman of holding mandatory office, public 59 ownership property 39, 31–5, 29, participation political 40–2 120–1 112, 105–9, 116–17 81–2 120 84 agreements 35–9 35 32–3, 82 rights e also see Index 64 59–60 55–65 58 95 17–24, 38, 39, 41, 56–8 56, 58 contracting into 20, 115–16, 118, 122 55–7, 106, 115 115–16, 118, 122 properties of citizenship 54, 55–65 processes 7, 12, 13, 15–17 42–5, 49–51, 87–8, 96 dependency, persons in state of exclusions 59–60 householders 55 independence 58–60 local citizens 62–3 long-term commitment 61–2, 95 membership and belonging 54, military service 64–5 political parties 56–7 politicians, professional class of 56, private interests 55–6 public good 55–6 reciprocity 59, 63–4 residence, period of continuous 62, European Union 24, 120 policies 111–13 property ownership 56–7 criminals, disenfranchisement of public goods and public interests Putney Debates of 1647 60–1 politicians, professional class of private arrangements, private interests 38–9, 41, 43, privatization of public services property ownership and P participation in community Plato 33, 106–7 political citizenship 1–12, 22–3, political parties 7–9, 117–18, 122 131 ethnicity and see 15 multiculturalism 54, 69–75 52–77 116–17 69–75, 77, 116 nationality 27, 28–9 58 115–16 16–17, 25, 52–77 118 84, 97–8 collective benefits and rights 12–13, ethnicity, nationality and exclusions and inclusions 12–13, gender 54, 65–9 property ownership 54, 55–65 right to have rights 87–8 N nationality military service 27–8, 33, 64–5 minorities 91, 117–18 models of citizenship 29–45 multiculturalism 2, 13, 24–5, 54, non-citizens, rights of 9–10, 87 normative theories of citizenship mentally ill 59–60 migrants 13, 24–5, 76–7, 95, Madison, James 38, 103 majority 8–9, 85, 90–1, 108–11, Marshall, T. H. 45, 47–50 membership and belonging 1, M Machiavelli, Niccolo 36, 37–8, legal citizenship 39–40, 50–1, 82, local democracy 61–2, 95, 104–5 Locke, John 41–2 language 70–1, 74, 76–7, 116, 117, L Citizenship oa oe 89 97–8 28–9, model Roman 45–6 Stein Rokkan, 78–96 13–17, 3, rights 87–96 17, 16, rights have to right 95 62–4, 59, residence 117 85, religion 120–1 105, 102–3, 100, referenda 94, 70–1, 63–4, 59, 8, reciprocity race R re oe,differences model, Greek 82 38–41, 29, equality 39 citizenship for eligibility 38 power of division 35–7 conflict class 38 balances and checks of secession Hill, Aventine 79 States United 48–50, rights economic and social rights institutional or positive 79 identity national 79 15, equality 14–15 to rights goods, collective 49, 47–8, 15, rights and duties civic 94–5 systems welfare 92 groups transnational political of self-determination 90 88, rights pre-political 90–1 majoritarianism 94 92, agreements international 95–6 intervention humanitarian 94–6 92, justice global 90–1 discrimination 94 countries developing documents, constitutional see tnct n nationality and ethnicity aerights have to right rights; human 114–15 rm35–9 from 36 to plebeians 91 82, 80–1, 87 78–9, 85 80, 95 communities 90–1 in entrenchment e also see 132 pra2,33 29, Sparta 74 70, 46–7, solidarity of theories sociological 74 contract social 58 Adam Smith, 83 separatism and self-determination S 39–41 law of rule 58, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, oigadrgtt oe2 –,14, 3–5, 2, vote to right and voting V 91, 79, 42–3, 38, States United 102 100, 34, unanimity U 27–9 citizenship of theories 76 73, tests 77 terrorism 63 taxes T l sus oigo 910 102 99–100, on voting issues, all oe ih o39 to right vote, People the of Tribunes and Senate 39–41 law of rule 35–7 plebeians and patricians 84, 82, 39–40, citizenship legal 36 powers judicial iiesi 45–51 citizenship 117 95, 74–5, self-government 99 7 1,118 115, 57, 107–8 102–3, 36 97–8 Index public interest 57–8 Roman citizenship 39 United States 110 W Weber, Max 56 welfare states 29, 69–70, 94–5 133 connection between 64–5 in 121 110 conscription and universal suffrage, decline in turnout 1, 3–4, 18–19,exclusions, 97 grounds for 12–13 first elections, voting or not voting majority rule 8–9, 108–11 proportional representation This page intentionally left blank Visit the VERY SHORT INTRODUCTIONS Web site

www.oup.co.uk/vsi

> Information about all published titles

> News of forthcoming books

>• Extracts from the books, including titles not yet published

> Reviews and views

> Links to other web sites and main OUP web page

> Information about VSIs in translation

> Contact the editors

> Order other VSIs on-line ARISTOTLE A Very Short Introduction Jonathan Barnes

The influence of Aristotle, the prince of philosophers, on the intellectual history of the West is second to none. In this book Jonathan Barnes examines Aristotle's scientific research, his discoveries in logic, his metaphysical theories, his work in psychology, ethics, and politics, and his ideas about art and poetry, placing his teachings in their historical context.

'With compressed verve, Jonathan Barnes displays the extraordinary Versatility of Aristotle, the great systematising empiricist.' Sunday Times

www.oup.co.uk/isbn/0-19-285408-9 POLITICS A Very Short Introduction Kenneth Minogue

In this provocative but balanced essay, Kenneth Minogue discusses the development of politics from the ancient world to the twentieth century. He prompts us to consider why political systems evolve, how politics offers both power and order in our society, whether democracy is always a good thing, and what future politics may have in the twenty-first century.

This is a fascinating book which sketches, in a very short space, one view of the nature of politics ... the reader is challenged, provoked and stimulated by Minogue's trenchant views.' Ian Davies, Talking Politics

'a dazzling but unpretentious display of great scholarship and humane reflection' Neil O'Sullivan, University of Hull

www.oup.co.uk/vsi/politics MACHIAVELLI A Very Short Introduction Quentin Skinner

Niccolo Machiavelli taught that political leaders must be prepared to do evil that good may come of it, and his name has been a byword ever since for duplicity and immorality. Is his sinister reputation deserved? In answering this question Quentin Skinner focuses on three major works - The Prince, the Discourses, and The History of Florence - and distils from them an introduction to Machiavelli's doctrines of exemplary clarity.

'Skinner succeeds brilliantly in this interpretation. Clear and concise, this book is the best short introduction of Machiavelli's thought that is available today.' Felix Gilbert, Italian Quarterly

'One can have nothing but praise for the clarity and intelligence of the work' Mark Phillips, History of European Ideas

www.oup.co.uk/isbn/0-19-285407-0 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION A Very Short Introduction William Doyle

Beginning with a discussion of familiar images of the French Revolution, garnered from Dickens, Baroness Orczy, and Tolstoy, this short introduction leads the reader to the realization that we are still living with the legacy of the French Revolution. It destroyed age-old cultural, institutional, and social structures in France and beyond. William Doyle shows how the ancien regime became ancien as well as examining cases in which achievement failed to match ambition, exploring its consequences in the arenas of public affairs and responsible government, and ending with thoughts on why the revolution has been so controversial.

'A brilliant combination of narrative and analysis, this masterly essay provides the best introduction to its subject in any language.' Tim Blanning, University of Cambridge

www.oup.co.uk/isbn/0-19-285396-1 HISTORY A Very Short Introduction John H. Arnold

History: A Very Short Introduction Is a stimulating essay about how we understand the past. The book explores various questions provoked by our understand- ing of history, and examines how these questions have been answered in the past. Using examples of how histor- ians work, the book shares the sense of excitement at discovering not only the past, but also ourselves.

'A stimulating and provocative introduction to one of col- lective humanity's most important quests - understand- ing the past and its relation to the present. A vivid mix of telling examples and clear cut analysis.' David Lowenthal, University College London

This is an extremely engaging book, lively, enthusiastic and highly readable, which presents some of the funda- mental problems of historical writing in a lucid and accessible manner. As an invitation to the study of history it should be difficult to resist.' Peter Burke, Emmanuel College, Cambridge

www.oup.co.uk/vsi/history