The Ideal Global Citizen - Essay Example

The Ideal Global Citizen Anything ideal is perceived to be synonymous with the epitome of perfection. An ideal person, therefore, would possess qualities and traits that would regard the person as a model of excellence when compared to others. There have been illuminative discourses that provide interesting arguments on the ideal global citizen from the perspectives of Madeleine Albright in "Faith and Diplomacy", and Kwame Anthony Appiah's "Making Conversation" and "The Primacy of Practice", among others. In one’s quest for greater understanding of the embodiment of an ideal global citizen, Friedman’s Dell theory was reviewed as the author expounded on universal concepts, co-operation, co-existence in the world of global supply chains, which is deemed directly related to the concept of being a global citizen. Likewise, one perceived that the concept of an ideal citizen is utopian and cannot be fully implemented in real life; though people should aim to get as close as they can to being “ideal citizens of the world”. The aim, therefore, is to present personal concepts for the ideal global citizen through an exploration of various contentions on education, religious knowledge and moral systems. A more comprehensive picture of a global citizen was expounded through reflecting on the definition of a global citizen. The inclusion of the term ‘global’ provided an expansive scope, and integrating the term ‘cosmopolitanism’ (Appiah 58) hoped to clarify one’s understanding of the embodiment of an ideal global citizen. Intricate as it seems, it is one’s perception that to establish conjectures of ultimately concluding that “cosmopolitanism is an adventure and an ideal” (Appiah 62), would be the only shared conviction with Appiah’s discussion. For one, the features or traits that make a global citizen ideal are those cited by Appiah of Christoph Martin Wieland’s 1778 essay in the journal Teutscher Merkur, quoted as: "Cosmopolitans . . . regard all the peoples of the earth as so many branches of a single family, and the universe as a state, of which they, with innumerable other rational beings, are citizens, promoting together under the general laws of nature the perfection of the whole, while each in his own fashion is busy about his own well-being” (Appiah 59). The ability to acknowledge that citizens are part of one universal family but recognizes individuality, privacy and confidentiality makes the concept ideal and global. It is one’s reflection that linking the concepts of idealism and globalization brings forth the validity in Thomas Friedman’s "The Dell Theory of Conflict Prevention". Friedman presents theoretical frameworks that argued that to attain global stability, the use of global diplomacy contributes to the prevention of impending wars across nations. Friedman’s famous contention is that “no two countries that are part of a major global supply chain, like Dell’s, will ever fight a war against each other as long as they are both part of the same global supply chain” (Friedman 125). Members of these global organizations could be exemplified as ideal global citizens in terms of exhibiting cooperation, co-existence and preferences for universal peace: the perfect, ideal scenario. Since one recognized that the concept of idealism is analogous to absolute perfectionism, an ideal global citizen, apart from acknowledging universality of being a citizen of the world, accepts the natural law for diversity in values and principles; yet, adhering to moral codes of conduct. As Albright cited Pope John Paul II’s argument that “if people were to fulfill their responsibility to live according to moral principles, they must first have the right to do so” (Albright 4). This is crucial as other people governed under a totalitarian regime or from a communist form of government are discriminated from complete expression of human rights that restricts the concept of an ideal global citizen. An ideal global citizen must have freedom to live and ability to select preferences for religious affiliations, political beliefs, academic pursuits, and make regular conversations without fear or contempt. Concurrently, it is valued that Faust’s acknowledgement and differentiation between practices and principles as the necessary ingredient for living in harmony. As disclosed, “practices and not principles are what enable us to live together in peace” (Appiah 72). Living in peace is therefore another crucial element that an ideal global citizen relishes. No citizen in war stricken nation could even state that one lives in a perfect environment. Without peace, there can be no perfection. When citizens are not accorded with opportunities to practice what they believe in or what their preferences are, there is definitely nothing ideal in the situation. An ideal global citizen would be able to practice personal beliefs and preferences in any manner possible and where ever possible, within the confines of legal, moral and ethical standards of behavior. Citizens who might be subjected to any form of restriction through civil unrest, political dictatorship, or societal discrimination do not have opportunities and freedom for personal expression; making peace impossible and far flung. It is strongly affirmed that ideal global citizens regard greater importance in being able to live according to what they like and how they like to live. As emphasized by Appiah “No doubt there are widely shared values that help Americans live together in amity. But they certainly don’t live together successfully because they have a shared theory of value or a shared story as to how to bring "their" values to bear in each case. They each have a pattern of life that they are used to; and neighbors who are, by and large, used to them. So long as this settled pattern is not seriously disrupted, they do not worry over-much about whether their fellow citizens agree with them or their theories about how to live” (64). Thus, an ideal global citizen lives an undisrupted life, free from ridicule or worry about whether values are shared or not. Not worrying though should not be misconceived as being indifferent. An ideal global citizen should have a commitment and sincere sense for social and environmental responsibility. Likewise, there is strong conviction that for a global citizen to be categorized in the ideal stature, adherence and acceptance to both universal and local values are aptly recognized. The statement that “there are some values that are, and should be, universal, just as there are lots of values that are, and must be, local” (Appiah 62) supports one’s assertions. An ideal global citizen recognized both the universality and locality of values; and gets the chance to choose which values are to be imbibed, practiced, and adhered to – with utter respect for others’ beliefs, principles, practices and way of life. However, in as much as acceptance to universality of values are recognized, an ideal global citizen retains individuality in expression of what one strongly believes in, particularly in terms of religious practices and cultural norms. The differentiation between principles and decisions to change further validate one's contention. Most people have long held beliefs and principles that are difficult to change. There are, however, some activities that could be easily transformed depending on external or internal forces that influence them. Appiah averred that “what moves people is often not an argument from a principle, not a long discussion about values, but just a gradually required new way of seeing things” (65). The ability to accept that change is a necessary part of life is innate to an ideal global person. Likewise, the will and commitment to live one’s life as one pleases should also be premised therefore according to the ethics of reciprocity. Doing good to others so that others would likewise do good to oneself is a universal concept that encompasses religious doctrines and beliefs – that which an ideal global citizen practices and adheres to. To highlight, an ideal global citizen is one who recognizes being part of a universal family but expresses individuality; must have freedom to live and ability to select preferences for religious affiliations, political beliefs, academic pursuits, and make regular conversations without fear or contempt; be able to live in peace; is accorded opportunities to practice what they believe in or what their preferences are; and lives an undisrupted life, free from ridicule or worry about whether values are shared or not. It is not actually living peacefully alone; but being able to share the world in perfect harmony with others and with personal conviction for social and environmental responsibility. An ideal global citizen thereby values and practices the concept of ethics of reciprocity, as universally observed. Finally, it is perceived that the concept of an ideal citizen could actually be utopian [Igl01]; as supported by Iglesias, “Utopian ideas that do not belong to this world, sometimes have an important influence in reality and may help to improve the course of events” (5). The personal assertions highlighted that ideal global citizens, despite supporting the “ideal of universal norms and institutions that give shape to a world order based on justice, liberty, and equality” [Igl01], also recognize that “the global rule of law remains Utopian or imperfect, and will remain so until the states freely decide to pool their sovereignty in common institutions and norms” [Igl01]. It is therefore finally acknowledged that the hope to achieve sharing universal ideals but accepting imperfection embodies the true ideal global citizen. The ideal global citizen ultimately realizes that “we have obligations to others, obligations that stretch beyond those to whom we are related…(and) we take seriously the value not just of human life but of particular human lives, which means taking an interest in the practices and beliefs that lend them significance” (Appiah 59). There is nothing ideal when individuals live for the purpose of serving one’s selfish interests; or seeking the achievement of the goals of a selected few. The real value of seeing idealism in a global citizen is the ability of that citizen to actively share what one has for the betterment of another, regardless of demographic profile, race, ethnic or cultural background, values or principles in life with adherence to legal, ethical and moral codes of conduct. Works Cited Albright, Madeleine. “Faith and Diplomacy.” Emerging: Contemporary Readings for Writers. Ed. Barclay Barrios. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2010. 23-33. Print. Appiah, Kwame Anthony. “Making Conversation.” Emerging: Contemporary Readings for Writers. Ed. Barclay Barrios. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2010. 57-72. Print. Friedman, Thomas. “The Dell’s Theory of Conflict Prevention”. Emerging: Contemporary Readings for Writers. Ed. Barclay Barrios. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2010. 121-138. Print. Iglesias, Gil Carlos Rodriguez. "Global Citizenship." 29 October 2001. Seton Hall Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations. 22 April 2012. . Read More