Supporting Social Liberal Citizenship - Essay Example

In Defence of Social liberal Citizenship Name Institution Course Tutor Date Citizenship, according to Marshall is divided into three aspects, which include social, civil and political. The social aspect involves the rights of individuals to education and social services (Marshall 1950:2). The Classicals definition of citizenship considers human being not only an active and moral, but also a political being. However, the modern perception of citizenship is based on the self-determination notion where a contract exists between the people and the government (Kartal 2003). Citizenship is not just having political membership, but also entails possession of particular civil rights as citizens. Citizenship in modern world involves political competence, a judicial status that allows rights and obligations, and a collection of moral qualities that define good citizenship (Lister 2007:52). Also the concept of citizenship revolves around the issues of civic allegiance, national identity and membership. This essay discusses the social liberal theoretical perspective of citizenship and indicates how it is applicable to the contemporary society. Social liberalism citizenship recognizes more the issue of social rights and beliefs that they are the basis for political equality and democracy in the modern society (Siim 2000:25). It tries to create a balance between social justice and individual liberty. Under this model of citizenship, it is believed that it is the role of the government to deal with social and economic problems, such as health care, poverty and education. In addition, social liberalism recognizes the community as a harmonious place where the freedom of individual must be observed. According to Beitz (1999:518) social liberalism views the international society into two perspectives. It considers the international territory to compromise of societies that are categorized as states. In this context, societies at the state level have the role to ensure the well-being of individuals living there. In addition, the international community ensures that it establishes and maintains an environment that facilitates the development and prosperity of just domestic societies. Beitz (1999:518) beliefs that the instruments of the international righteousness which comprise of states are responsible of ensuring political equality and every state should show commitment to and satisfy the legitimate rights of its individuals. The concept of social liberalism also values political freedom. Even though the state is responsible for ensuring protection of individual rights, it is also supposed to leave individuals to make their own decisions on how to live (Bachet, Durand & Hargrave (2001:136). In addition, social liberalism requires a dedication to a fair distribution of power and wealth among individuals. However, rights of property are considered by social liberals as state policy instruments which are meant to contribute to the general goals (Kymlicka 2002:302). Thus, social liberal citizenship tries to address social and economic differences in the state. The idea behind this type of citizenship is to secure the basic social rights and liberties of all citizens (Kartal 2003). Marshall considered social rights as the responsibility of states to ensuring that its people have access to both social and economic security (Marshall 1950). In states where social democratic welfare is part of their interests, the concept of social rights implies making the welfare system universal and defining it as a collective right for all individuals irrespective of social or income class (Beitz 1999:520). Social rights and protection in the society reduces the magnitude of public disagreement and promotes social co-operation in a manner that enhances unity (Kymlicka 2002). Thus, people in the society co-operate as free and equal persons without any form of discrimination. Also, the society is designed in a way that promotes the good of its members, yet regulated by the conception of fair dealing among the public (Parla 2008:4). In such a society, everyone is guided and accept the principles of social rights, which are satisfied by the existing social institutions. In social liberalism, the main social institutions have the responsibility to distribute essential rights and duties (Kartal 2003). They also ensure that all citizens benefit from the advantages of social cooperation equally. In this case, the main social institutions are significant since they define the rights and duties of citizens and also influence the decisions they make in life. In contemporary social liberal society, some essential rights may not be sacrificed for the welfare of the general public (March 2009). Nevertheless, all values such as income and wealth, liberty and opportunity should be distributed equally to the public. In case of unequal distribution of such values, then it should be to the advantage of everyone in the society. Democratic societies follow a social liberal philosophy with the notion that it is the duty of the government to regulate and manage the economy, as well as ensure right protection (Parla 2008). The social liberal principles in such societies include redistribution of economic wealth in a way that those in need can benefit. In social liberal citizenship, the government has to ensure that it takes care of all people by providing basic needs such as food stamps, healthcare, education and welfare to those in need (Parla 2008). This still narrows down to the principle of social rights. Provision of a social safety net and equal opportunity irrespective of social class people belong to are the ultimate goal of social liberal societies. Social liberalism emphasizes democracy, more so democratic participation. This is likely to bring about potential tension between social liberalism and markets (Beitz 1999:522). Through markets, individuals can communicate their abilities and views to others without much struggle, which is done through price (Brack, Grayson & Howarth 2007). In addition, democracy, in both its participative and representative form also implies advanced form of democracy. This means that although both democracy and markets use types of rationality, the one of the market is closed (Brack, Grayson & Howarth 2007). Unlike democracy, the market limits itself to what determining the effects of what individual happen would want to have. Social liberals are attracted to markets because they have the ability to encourage innovation and diffuse power (Bachet, Durand & Hargrave 2001:137). However, they are also driven back due to being impersonal. In any case, markets have the ability to weaken political freedom by destabilizing political activity, in such a way that necessitates people to get what they want with inadequate dialogue between the parties (Brack, Grayson & Howarth 2007). The risks of changing political participation with markets are evident in the current British society. In particular, this has resulted to the increase in consumer politics, where the vote of an individual is considered as a tool of self-interest and not for the good of all citizens (Brack, Grayson & Howarth 2007). In addition, it contributes to increase in disillusion with politics, which is a significant intimidation to political freedom (Bachet, Durand & Hargrave 2001). Ideally, when we see politics as merely buying products in a market, it will lose the rationality and in the long run will never be credible. Conclusively, the social liberals believe in more government involvement, redistribution of income to support the needy and promotion of social rights to individuals. Thus, I belief that social liberal citizenship is the appropriate model in the contemporary society. The issue of social rights and protection can be promoted if resources are shared equally among citizens, irrespective of where they come from and their social and economic classes. The notion of struggle for the fittest exposes the less fortunate to more disadvantages in the society. I would prefer a situation where there is high government intervention in helping citizens have equal access and benefit from basic needs such as food, education, health care, housing, security and employment. In deed, essential rights should not be surrendered for the general welfare and this can be ensured through social liberalism. References Bachet D, Durand J P & Hargrave J 2001 “Social-liberalism in France,” Capital & Class, 25(3): pp. 135-148. Beitz C R 1999 “Social and cosmopolitan liberalism,” International Affairs, 75(3): pp. 515-529. Brack D, Grayson R S & Howarth D 2007 “Reinventing the state: Social liberalism for the 21st century,” Politico's. Kartal F 2003 “Liberal and Republic Conceptualization of Citizenship: A Theoretical Inquiry,” Kymlicka W 2002 “Contemporary Political Philosophy: Citizenship Theory,” 7, pp. 284-326. Lister R 2007 “Inclusive Citizenship: Realizing the Potential 1,” Citizenship studies, 11(1): pp. 49-61. March A F 2009 “Islam and Liberal Citizenship: The Search for an Overlapping Consensus,” Oxford University Press, USA. Marshall T H 1950 “Citizenship and Social Class: And Other Essays,” Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Parla K 2008 “Democratic versus Republican Perspectives,” Siim B 2000 “Gender and Citizenship: Politics and Agency in France, Britain and Denmark,” Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Read More