The Notion of Citizenship Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays

NAME : XXXXXXXXXX TUTOR : XXXXXXXXXX TITLE : XXXXXXXXXXX COURSE : XXXXXXXXXX INSTITUTION : XXXXXXXXXX @2009 Introduction Citizenship is a dynamic, multidimensional, contextual and contested concept. The meanings and characteristics of the notion citizenship have changed all through history. Different societies have tended to interpret and apply the notion of citizenship quite differently. It has been hard for scholars to come up with a universal agreed-upon definition of citizenship. The term citizenship connotes at least four different dimensions; status, identity, civic virtues and agency (Heater 1990). As a status, citizenship is frequently equated with nationality, that is, a member of a particular nation-state. Citizenship as a status differentiate between citizens who are permanent members of a specific political community, and hence have a national identity card and are entitled to vote and stand for elections, and non-citizens, who have limited or no rights at all. In modern times, the status of citizenship is often granted by birth or naturalization. A citizen is entitled to three types of rights; civil, political and social (Marshall 1950). Civil right involves rights to individual freedom, for example, freedom of speech, expression, and religion and property ownership. Political rights involve the right to vote and be voted for and form and join associations. Social rights involve the rights to education, health, social security, employment, housing, safe environment, minimum wage and socio-economic wellbeing. According to Marshall, “citizenship is a status bestowed on those who are full members of a community. All who possess the status are equal with respect to the rights and duties with which the status is endowed” (Marshall 1950:28-29). Citizenship as an identity refers to matters of belonging and meaning. Identity is about feeling like a member of a particular community and it is rooted in factors such as common language, history, religion, values, culture and traditions (Heater 1990). Citizenship as a civic virtue refers to the values, behaviors and attitudes that are expected of good citizens. However, there is no agreed upon qualities of good citizen. For some nations, the main civic virtues of a good citizen include diligence, patriotism, obedience and religiosity. Others emphasize tolerance, respect, solidarity, compassion and accountability. Yet, others relate civic virtues to community engagement, critical thinking, political participation and good knowledge of social reality. The notion of citizenship as agency invokes the thought of citizens as social actors. It is here that we speak of active and passive citizenship. Active citizenship is those citizens who actively take part in political, social, economic and cultural life (Roche 1986). The Notion of citizenship and Social Justice The notion of citizenship is utilized as a language that might maintain solidarity. The language of citizenship is used within the community to remind people of their common ties. Citizenship entails shared commitment. For example, an Australian citizen is a member of the Commonwealth which serves as a common bond, uniting all Australians, while respecting their diversity. Contemporary notion of citizenship also focus on imaginary connections based on common history, culture, sex, language, race and religion. However, modern conceptualization of citizenship has ignored the role played by women, the Aboriginals and Torres Strait island people and migrants in public life in Australia (Burney 1994). The notion of citizenship has been used to promote gender justice. Gender justice is a right-based approach to development thinking. Both the political and legal institutions are important in developing the economy. The association between communication of citizens and group preferences and state responses are quite critical when it comes to economic development. Right-based approaches seek to set up the basic rights that citizens may legally claim from the state. They recognize that power relations influence the outcome of policies and that a state of law and responsibility is paramount to advance human development. The recognize that power imbalances between men and women can prevent women from acting to advance their interests and that social, economical and political institutions must be made accountable to women (McClelland and Smyth 2006). Social citizenship is a notion of citizenship which was coined in the twentieth century and is understood in terms of the principle of equality of status. All members of a particular political community are thus equal in respect to rights and duties of that community (Wagner 2008). Social citizenship contributes to equality of status by helping to develop a common culture in which the differences social classes and other groupings are less sharp. It ensures that economic resources are distributed equally in such a manner to lessen the extent of socials inequality. It brings about equality of status across the social structure. Social citizenship leads to a universal reduction in risks and insecurity by equalizing between the more and less unfortunate in society, that is, between the healthy and the unhealthy, the working and the unemployed, the old and the young, the single and the married. Apart from finding out what is needed to take part in or membership of a community, citizenship is also concerned with non-political abilities which themselves are directly related to access to social resources. Citizenship means equal access to decent heath care, food, housing, employment, child care and education for all citizens (Redden 2002). Social citizenship is a rights-based approach in which citizens can develop goals, assess and evaluate policies and determine progress. The practice of citizenship is that a social policy should constitute a positive contribution to the overall participation of members to a particular political community. A social policy therefore should be based on the principle of social right and participation and it should be inclusive as possible (McClelland and Smyth 2006). The notion of social citizenship presents a logical and generally understood framework based on the notion of rights. Social rights form the fundamental ideas of social citizenship and are integrated within the wider framework of political and civil rights. However, it is important to note that the notion of social rights have not played a significant role in the formulation of social policy in Australia. The notion of social citizenship has helped address social issues such as marginality, disadvantage, inequality, poverty by developing the kinds of policies needed to address them. The notion of social citizenship has acted as a perfect mechanism for developing meaningful, effective and lasting social policy approaches. Social policy has tended to be more inclusive leading to enhanced models of service delivery. Social citizenship focuses largely on the institutions that are able to deal with class-based and other structural types of disadvantage (Pixley 1993). Citizenship-based social inclusive approaches regard social policy as an investment in human capital and therefore advocates for strong education and health systems (Wagner 2008). Social policy should avoid at all cost problems essentials for the development of poor human capital such as poor education and health, social and economic marginalization as they act as limits to productivity and economic progress. Social citizenship aims at developing the essential infrastructure necessary for both preventing exclusions and enabling participation. Social citizenship ensures that there is sufficient investment in resources such as education, training, employment services and employment creation. Social citizenship gives citizens the opportunity to participate in designing and setting objectives and priorities of social institutions such as hospitals and schools. The notions of obligation and responsibility associated with citizenship have also been applied to social policy. For example, it is the primary obligation of the society to ensure that those who are not employed find employment (Pixley 1993). Feminist concerns and Views of Citizenship The notion of citizenship as a human agency forms the basis of a feminism theory of citizenship. Social citizenship is conceptualized in a market-oriented manner as it emphasis on citizenship obligation and especially the obligation to participate in paid employment. Feminists argue that this obligation should apply to those caring for children and especially single parents. Feminists are therefore concerned with how care can fit into any configuration of citizenship obligations. The main goal of feminists is to correct the current imbalance between rights and responsibilities. Feminism view active citizenship as local people working in collaboration to better their own quality of life and to present conditions for other to benefit from the fruits of a more wealthy society. The disadvantaged people, especially women, for example though community groups do for themselves more than the advantaged people could have done for them (Hobson and Lister 2002). The twentieth century feminism has emphasized on the interaction of political and social citizenship as the key to development of women’s status as citizens. Social rights reflect to the degree to which women have participated in their own development. Feminist theory of citizenship adopts a synthetic-based framework which embraces two types of rights; the individual rights and political participation. The notion of human agency is at the centre of this conceptualization. This conceptualization of citizenship has been paramount in challenging the construction of women as passive citizens and the prejudiced and oppressive male-dominated political, economical and social institutions which still refute women full citizenship (Hobson and Lister 2002). Though it has not been reflected in most literature, women form a large proportion of migrants and asylum-seekers and have therefore been excluded from political participation. This calls for a multicultural model of citizenship. For example, Australia came up with multicultural language policies which give official acknowledgment of the languages of significant minority ethnic groups. .However, the precise nature of such a model is contested as it runs the danger of treating cultural groups as homogenous, disregarding diversities such as age, class, gender and sexuality (Delanty 2002). The other problem of multicultural citizenship is that it solidifies cultural differences. The notion of trans-cultural citizenship is suggested as one of the possible way of evading some of these pitfalls. However, its impacts, both theoretically and politically, need further investigation (Yuval-Davis1999). Feminism advocates for the legitimization of women’s needs as genuine political matters rather than private matters and recognizes that needs and priorities differ for different women’s groups (Delanty 2002). From a feminism perspective, citizenship entails more than simply being a formal relationship between an individual and the state. Feminism conceptualizes “citizenship as a more total relationship, inflected by identity, social positioning, cultural assumptions, institutional practices and a sense of belonging (Yuval-Davis1999:4). This has lead to the growth of politics of identity and the notion of cultural citizenship. The identities that people deploy in their everyday life have something to do with citizenship. This is why Yuval-Davis has advocated for a multi-tiered notion of citizenship, which recognizes individuals as members in different collectivities. This notion of citizenship acknowledges that people are not bounded by a single group identity. This move also recognizes that people and groups can be exploited by the same collectivities that are alleging citizenship rights depending on their group’s discrimination and disadvantage. For example, women can be denied rights of the dominant community, based on racial and religious collective rights. To some extent, this can lead to violence and even death for women who disobey religious and cultural rules (Yuval-Davis 1999). Feminism is based on the ethics of care and it advocates for the recognition of care responsibilities as work and therefore deserves to be paid. Feministic citizenship is constructed on the ideology that women and men are equal participant in work and family life. As a result, social policies are being formulated to promote paternal participation in childcare by adopting paternity maternity leave. Feminists tend to define citizenship in terms of care responsibilities as a way of recognizing the contribution to citizenship from other unpaid work, particularly community and voluntary work, in which women are the greatest contributors (Brown and Smith. 1993). Feminism views a person who engages in community service as a good citizen as he/she promotes the welfare of the community. Feminists therefore advocate for the definition of citizenship as an obligation that embraces the unpaid work, for example, care and community work. As a result, most countries are now communing up with social policies that acknowledge mothers as work-citizens alongside men. Some countries are even developing appropriates social infrastructures designed to enable mothers to combine their caring and paid employment responsibilities (Lister 1997). Feminism has extended the notion of social citizenship to include reproduction and sexuality rights introducing another aspect of social rights, the social body rights. Feminists have argued that reproductive rights are a precondition of participatory citizenship, as to deny women the right to decide is to undermine their right to take part in political sphere and polity. Feminists have taken a right-base approach to abortion, a stand with have raised heated debate between legal and social scholars. Disabled feminists have argued that a diagnosis of foetal abnormality automatically validates abortion. As a result, most countries have come up with social and civic rights to abortion. Sexuality citizenship advocates for lesbian and gay couples to have equally access to social benefits, pensions, parental leave and other public services (Phelan 2001). Gender-pluralist based approaches acknowledge that the contours of citizenship are not shaped by gender alone, but by the interaction of gender with other factors such as age, sexuality, class, disability and race (Lister 1993). Feminists argue that although citizenship have existed for centuries, women have had little share in civic rights. This means that citizenship have been a status made-up by men for men. Equality feminism generally advocates for full inclusion of women in the political sphere, pointing out the lack of women access to conventional political arenas of political decision-making as well as the imbalanced representation of women in leadership position (Voet 1994). Liberal feminists have cone up with another notion of citizenship, the gender-neutral citizen. This notion of citizenship emphasizes on equal rights and obligations irrespective of gender. The main aim is to enable women to compete on equal terms with men in economic, social and political sphere of life. Contemporary proponents of gender-neutral citizens recognize the need for citizenship change in the private sphere, especially in the gender division of labor. Liberal feminism aims at enhancing women’s and girls’ public achievement through legal and educational reforms, such as affirmative action and non-sexiest educational policies (Wagner 2008). Opponent of gender-neutral citizens argues that a gender-differentiated citizen is paramount in addressing the imbalance of oppression that has been there for centuries. Difference feminists take a different move toward the public and private debate. They perceive the difference in women as a sign of strength rather than weakness. The public sphere can benefits from the values, qualities and skills that women have developed both as a result of their long confinement in the private sphere of family and child nurturing and their biological capacity to reproduce. Feminists argue that citizenship should not only be based on the principle of equality but also difference (Hobson and Lister 2002). In relation to this, Turner has proposed a three dimensional notion of citizenship; extent, content and depth. The rules and norms of inclusion and exclusion in a particular nation-state determine the extent of citizenship in terms of boundaries of membership within a particular political community. The combination of citizenship rights and obligations determines the content of citizenship, indicating how the benefits and costs of membership should be distributed. The depth of citizenship is determined by the way identities members’ particular communities are understood and accommodated (Turner 2001). Postmodern feminists attempt to combat different types of oppression that prevent women and other marginalized groups from participating in the political sphere. They advocate for a public sphere that is more responsive and particularistic to the differences and pluralities of people, notably those who have experienced various types of oppression, the disabled, the black and minority ethnic groups, women, gays, lesbians and the old (Voet 1994). Critiques of difference feminism argue that citizenship is not simply single identity but should permits for a pluralist identity and respect of individual freedom. They emphasize on the plurality of women’s oppression based on varying social contexts such as immigrants and asylum-seekers, and other factors, for example, race, ethnicity, religion and nationality. This leads us to a plural identity and membership, creating gender-plural citizens (Werbner and Yuval-Davis 1999). This is the modern conception of citizenship as being democratic. Conclusion The notion citizenship is a dynamic, multidimensional, contextual and contested. It has been taken to connote status, identity, agency and civic virtue. The notion of citizenship has been used to promote social justice by ensuring that all citizens have equal access to social, economical and political resources, such as education, health care, housing, employment among other. Feminism theory of citizenship is basically founded on the conceptualization of citizenship as a human agency. They have advocated for a notion of citizenship that promotes not only equality, but also difference and have therefore advocate for a gender-plural model of citizenship. References Brown, H. and H. Smith. 1993. Women Caring for People: the Mismatch between Rhetoric and women's reality? Policy and Politics 21 (Mo. 3): 185-193. Burney L. 1994. Speaking Publicly: An Aboriginal Way of Being Australian. Australian Feminist Studies 19 (Autumn): 17-24. Delanty G. (2002). ‘Two Conceptions of Cultural Citizenship: A Review of Recent Literature on Culture and Citizenship’, The Global Review of Ethno politics. Vol. 1, no. 3, March. Heater, D. 1990. Citizenship: The Civic Ideal in World History, Politics and Education. London: Longman Hobson B. and Lister R. 2002. "Citizenship". In Contested concepts in gender and social politics, edited by Barbara Hobson, Lewis, J., and Siim, B. 23-54. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. Lister, R. 1993. Tracing the contours of women’s citizenship. Policy and Politics 21 (1): 3-16. Lister, R. 1997. Citizenship: Feminist perspectives. New York: Macmillan. Marshall, T. H. (1950) Citizenship and social class. Cambridge: Cambridge University Pres. McClelland, A. and Smyth, P. (eds.) 2006. Social Policy in Australia, Understanding for Action. Melbourne: Oxford Press. Phelan S. 2001. Sexual Strangers: Gays, lesbians and dilemmas of citizenship. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Pixley J. 1993. Citizenship and Employment: investigating post-industrial options. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Redden, C, J. 2002. Health Care as Citizenship Development: Examining Social Rights and Entitlement. Canadian Journal of Political Science / Revue canadienne de science politique 35:1 (March/Mars) pp 103-125. Roche M. 1986. Rethinking Citizenship. Cambridge: Polity. Turner B. 2001. "The erosion of citizenship." British Journal of Sociology, 52: 189-209. Voet R. (1994) Woman as Citizens: A Feminist Debate Australian Feminist Studies 19 (Autumn: 61-77). Wagner, A. 2008. "Citizenship through education. A comment on Social Exclusion in Europe: some conceptual issues". International Journal of Social Welfare, 17: 93-97. Yuval-Davis, N. 1999. "Ethnicity, gender relations and multiculturalism." In Race, identity and citizenship. Oxford: Blackwell Press. Yuval-Davis, N. and Werbner P. 1999. Women, Citizenship and Difference. London: Zed Books. Read More

The Notion of Citizenship - Essay Example

Extract of sample "The Notion of Citizenship"