Chapter 2

About citizenship

This chapter offers a summary of the different approaches to citizenship.

In the section “An ongoing quest”, An ongoing quest, we look at quotations from various philosophers, politicians and social scientists talking about citizenship. They provide an insight into the evolution of ideas about citizenship in the last 50 years.

Citizenship is traditionally defined as the relationship between the state and the individual. Yet, by now we know that, because of the changing needs of people and their circumstances, their relationship with the state is affected by an ever-expanding list of other aspects, one of which is the relationship between the individual and society. In the section “Current forms”, we look at the four common constructs of citizenship which define the relationship between the state and the individual. In Chapter 3, “A social practice”, we explore the four dimensions of the relationship between the individual and society, and the meanings of people’s sense of belonging.

Citizenship is a contested notion (i.e. there are many different understandings) because traditions and approaches to citizenship vary across history and across Europe, according to different countries’ histories, societies, cultures and ideologies. All these different ideas about citizenship live together in a fruitful – but also troublesome – tension that has economic, social and political implications.

Within any of these different understandings, from the perspective of the individual, citizenship is an intrinsically contested notion because it implies a permanent interaction and negotiation between the personal needs, interests, values, beliefs, attitudes and behaviours of each citizen and the communities in which they live and participate.

AN ONGOING QUEST

By the end of the 1960s and the beginning of the 1970s, the straightforward understanding of citizenship as a status given by the state to the individual started to be questioned.

 Citizenship is the practice of a moral code – a code that has concern for the interest of others – grounded in personal self-development and voluntary co-operation rather than the repressive compulsive power of state intervention. (Hayek, 1967: 79)

Definitions of citizenship started to point to the free will of the individual and the question of belonging to a community.

 Citizenship is a status bestowed on all 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. There are not universal principles that determine what those rights and duties shall be, but societies in which citizenship is a developing institution create an image of ideal citizenship. (Marshall, 1973)

The rights which come with citizenship status, as well as the responsive duties, start to be named in the 1970s, which initiated an ongoing process of claim and provision by both the state and the citizens.

 Citizenship is the peaceful struggle through a public sphere which is dialogical. (Habermas, 1994)

During the 1990s, concepts of citizenship were once more questioned, following an increase in migration and various needs becoming apparent in society. The introduction of multidimensional citizenship created links between citizenship, identity and diversity.

The world order changed with the fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the USSR, which also meant for the ex-Soviet states a need for reconsideration of many notions, particularly of citizenship, participation, democracy and freedom. This was for a generation a time of crisis of identity, and for younger generations it was a time of searching for their identity in complete reconsideration of social and democratic values.

 Citizenship is not just a certain status, defined by a set of rights and responsibilities. It is also an identity, an expression of one’s membership in a political community. (Kymlicka and Norman, 1995)

 Citizenship is a complex and multidimensional concept. It consists of legal, cultural, social and political elements and provides citizens with defined rights and obligations, a sense of identity, and social bonds. (Ichilov, 1998)

The diverse everyday practices of individuals were once left to the private spaces of people in the name of ensuring equality in status. Today, the challenge is to redefine citizenship in such a way that these differences can also be practised in public spaces, as the mood of the times is asking for.

CURRENT FORMS

In literature and in practice, we see that the notion of citizenship is generally defined and practised in four different forms, each with a different basis:

Knowledge of these different forms can be helpful in understanding each other when debating citizenship. The parties of the debate may not be referring to the same practice even though they are using the same “C word”.

Citizenship based on national identity

The roots of citizenship based on national identity date back to the French Revolution. The foundation of the state sovereignty was named as “the nation”. By this time, the word “nation” referred to the people living within the geographical borders of the state.

In time, together with the increasing power associated with the state, the importance associated with the people of the state, called “the nation”, started to increase as well. Historically, the rise of people’s sovereignty and the rise of nationalism overlapped. Derek Heater (1990) refers to this as a “historical accident”.

Simultaneously the term citoyen (“citizen”) started to be used for people who had a raised consciousness of the nation and its related responsibilities, whereas “the people” referred to the masses. In time, the words “nation” and “people” started to be used interchangeably and the term “national sovereignty” became the centre of power.

Today, still in many countries and languages, the word “citizen” refers to a member of the nation, and the words “citizenship” and “nationality” are used interchangeably. And in some countries nationality is very much linked with ethnicity.

Citizenship based on papers

The term “citizenship” is sometimes used to refer to the official papers which legalise the status of the people in relation to the state, namely identity cards and passports. Each person holding the passport of a state is considered to be a citizen of that state.

Although this practice may seem to provide a simple, clear and fair approach, we need to be aware that these papers may have different versions which guarantee different rights for different people. One good example would be the overseas territories (former colonies) of various European countries. The people living in the overseas territories would usually hold a passport of the European country, yet this passport would not grant them the right to live there. Similarly, people living in states which have experienced several years of border conflicts may have passports or identity cards from another country which would facilitate their cross-border travel. Yet, having such papers would not guarantee them the same civil or social rights as the citizens of the provider country.

Therefore, it is crucial to keep in mind that, when we are talking about paper-based citizenship, being a member of a state does not always mean having papers, and having official papers does not always mean being a citizen.

Citizenship based on duties and responsibilities

Citizenship practices based on duties and responsibilities are often seen in contexts where the liberal school of thought is less influential than the communitarian one. The communitarian tradition rates the greater public good more highly than the individual’s needs and rights.

In this practice, citizenship is related to a list of duties assigned for the citizen by the state. The order and the wealth of the society are believed to depend on the everyday practices of citizens and their readiness to compromise on needs.

The list of duties may cover the responsibilities of citizens not only in the public sphere, but also in their private space. For example, the use of language or the practice of traditions of dress can be related to being a “good citizen”.

The main objective of national education is to inform and educate young citizens about the roles, duties and responsibilities awaiting them in the future. The education system is clearly the best place to analyse the expectations of the state from its citizens.

Citizenship based on rights

In the literature exploring citizenship and citizens’ rights, modern citizenship contains civic, political and social rights. Civic rights refer to the legal and juridical rights that people gained against absolute states in the 18th century. The development of political rights is mostly related to the development of parliamentary systems in the 19th century. Social rights such as welfare state politics are mostly related to citizenship by the 20th century. Although the evolution of modern citizenship differs in different places, analysing which set of rights emerged first may give clues about the development of rights-based citizenship practices.

In countries where social rights emerged much later than civic rights, not all citizens can enjoy their social rights. On the contrary, in some examples, the rights to residence and citizenship can only be granted on condition that the person gives up their social rights and claims no support from the state, even when in need. Although the citizenship is based on a certain set of rights (in this case, rights to a residence and passport), it does not guarantee the fulfilment of all rights (in the same case, the right to social support).

In the Arabic language two different words are used to differentiate these two types of citizenship based on rights. Cinsiyye stands for passport citizenship, which grants the right to stay in a country. On the other hand, the term muvatana refers to democratic citizenship, which also includes the practice of civic, political and social rights.

Diverse practices of rights in relation to the same citizenship carry the risk of triggering divisions and discrimination in society.