Citizenship as an idea was revived in the 1980s. In Western Europe and North America there was a growing concern that Western individualism and consumerist lifestyles had eroded the importance of political community. In the face of new questions being raised by feminist and ecological movements, declining levels of political participation and the erosion of welfare state provision, there was an increasing concern to introduce a more explicitly moral language into the everyday practice of politics. In the state socialist societies of Central and Eastern Europe, questions of citizenship were also raised in connection with the imposition of state control, the exclusion of civil society and neglect of political rights. In their different ways these academic and political debates sought to recover a language of belonging, rights and obligation.
First, citizenship is concerned with questions of membership and is therefore both inclusive and exclusive. By definition, discussions of British and/or European citizenship do not include non-British or non-European citizens. In this respect, this necessitates decisions as to who is to count as a member. For example, recent debates regarding refugees have involved a discussion of citizenship in terms of the procedures which must be successfully negotiated if one is to be granted the legal status of citizen. However, questions of belonging have been further complicated recently, with some social movements arguing for a global citizenship which potentially includes all inhabitants of the planet earth. Even here decisions have to be made in respect of the status of children and the environment, as well as the weight that should be given to future generations.
Second, ideas of citizenship are often discussed in terms of rights. To have a right means to be able to make a claim on something. In its initial conception citizenship was thought to be a three-tiered model that included civil, political and social rights. Civil rights might include equality before the law and political rights freedom of assembly and the intellectual freedoms associated with supporting political parties. Yet, it has been social rights that the labour and trade union movements of the 20th century have been most concerned to protect and extend. The right to a good education, welfare benefits and health-care all had to be struggled for in the face of opposition. The breakdown of the post-war political consensus in respect of social rights has meant that this domain has become increasingly contested in recent years. The privatization of public services and welfare functions currently constitutes a key area of dispute in respect of citizenship rights. Further, many previously marginal social groups are seeking to claim cultural as well as social, political and civil rights. Cultural rights are usually concerned with the desire to have one’s lifestyle recognized by the wider community. Such claims have been raised by a number of cultural ‘minorities’ which wish to maintain their way of life in the face of opposition or criticism from the mainstream community.
Finally, the language of obligation or duties has been central to questions of citizenship. Many argue that rights and duties are actually inseparable and that it makes little sense to have rights to welfare without the duty to pay taxes. Indeed, many critics have pointed out that Western liberal societies have forgotten the language of obligation which has in turn promoted social atomism. In particular, the ecological movement has sought to introduce a rich political language of a duty of care in respect of the environment. In this context, to be overly concerned with our entitlements or rights will mean that current political and lifestyle practices will be insufficiently concerned with our obligations towards non-human organisms, our common environment and potential citizens of the future.
Nick Stevenson
University of Nottingham
This is the complete article, containing 611 words
(approx. 2 pages at 300 words per page).
