Suchergebnisse

Benhabib argues that the tension between universal human rights and democratic self-determination cannot be resolved. Distinguishing between the principle of rights, on the one hand, and context-specific `schedules of rights', on the other hand, helps, however, to specify the scope of both norms. I show that applying this idea to questions of citizenship requires further elaboration in three respects: (1) Benhabib's argument for porous rather than open borders, which does not fully address the challenge of global distributive justice; (2) norms for access to citizenship, which need to cover also transnational affiliations between sending states and their external populations; and (3) necessary constraints on democratic self-determination. I suggest replacing the principle of self-determination with a principle of self-government that does not include a unilateral right to determine the territorial or membership boundaries of the polity. [Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications Ltd., copyright 2007.]

In countries open for emigration & immigration, large numbers of citizens live outside the state territory & large numbers of non-citizens reside permanently in this territory. In many democracies, both groups will be excluded from democratic participation & representation. Yet more & more states revise their conceptions of citizenship to grant voting rights & political participation to non-citizen residents or non-resident citizens. This poses a considerable challenge to democratic theory. Under certain conceptions only one of these groups, but not the other has a claim to inclusion. Starting from a comparative examination of political participation rights, my contribution will discuss some arguments for & against expanding political citizenship beyond territory & formal nationality. Tables, References. Adapted from the source document.

Examines the phenomenon of extending electoral rights to expatriate citizens & to noncitizen residents. Why governments expand voting rights in this way is considered, finding a mixed bag of reasons. A nonterritorial conception of nationhood, often rooted in ethnic nationalism, is seen as a prime reason. Voting rights for noncitizen residents is less widespread but found in various forms around the world, & reasons for introducing this form of franchise are also mixed. Four contrasting ideal-typical positions for or against electoral rights beyond territory & citizenship are outlined & rejected, & an alternative principle, stakeholder citizenship, is proposed. 16 References. J. Zendejas

The relation between migration & domestic security is complex but in constant danger of being politically simplified. The general assumption spread by media reports & political speeches is that uncontrolled immigration endangers security directly by facilitating transborder criminal activity or indirectly by creating general conditions within society that diminish the state's capacity to maintain public order or to produce societal security in a more comprehensive sense. The contribution argues that an adequate analysis needs to modify this prima facie plausible account. First, there are important trade-offs between enhancing security & freedom of movement because the latter creates important benefits & has in a liberal perspective also intrinsic value. Second, migration control may itself endanger security by illegalizing human actions that cannot be de facto prevented & by creating a market for human trafficking. Third, closing borders for ongoing immigration flows may paradoxically increase inflows in the short run & prevent return migration in the long run. The essay examines further how migration affects the state's capacity to produce four public goods that are often included in a comprehensive conception of societal security: demographic sustainability, cultural homogeneity, democratic self-determination, & social security. Among these, redistributive welfare policies provide the strongest argument for immigration control, but cannot fully justify present priorities, levels, & means. A final aspect of the relation between migration & security is, however, the securitization of migration policy discourses that generally trumps other arguments & creates widespread support for counterproductive & normatively indefensible policies. 28 References. Adapted from the source document.

Explores cosmopolitanism in terms of political communities that transcend state borders, situating this treatment in the field of cosmopolitan democracy that views human needs as best served by global political institutions. Discussion opens with a consideration of various interpretations of cosmopolitanism, contending that political theorists employ the term without any idea of a global community of citizens. It is asserted that two ways exist for building political communities beyond national identities, assimilation into larger communities that replicate particularistic nationhood traits or federalization that fosters loyalties to the larger unit. The latter, multinational federalism, appears most promising. However, such a cosmopolitan project must address issues of asymmetry, enlargement, & democratization. In this light, it is asked whether current conditions of globalization even allow for the emergence of a global political community before even considering the possibility of cosmopolitan democracy. Thus, various patterns of extant supranational political community are examined to determine their impact on democratic citizenship. Four boundary regimes through which political communities can relate in a larger supranational context are identified: separate, nested, multilevel, or overlapping. It is argued that, in fact, the state system is transforming via a combination of the nested, multilevel, & overlapping patterns. In this light, the UN & EU are assessed. Focus turns to overlapping affiliations as manifest in transborder national minorities, global networks of indigenous groups, & transnational migrant communities. It is concluded that a cosmopolitan democracy might arise from this overlapping pattern of minority communities should an endogenous development of liberal norms emerge in response to challenges raised by the claims of these transnational communities' leaders. J. Zendejas

Explores cosmopolitanism in terms of political communities that transcend state borders, situating this treatment in the field of cosmopolitan democracy that views human needs as best served by global political institutions. Discussion opens with a consideration of various interpretations of cosmopolitanism, contending that political theorists employ the term without any idea of a global community of citizens. It is asserted that two ways exist for building political communities beyond national identities, assimilation into larger communities that replicate particularistic nationhood traits or federalization that fosters loyalties to the larger unit. The latter, multinational federalism, appears most promising. However, such a cosmopolitan project must address issues of asymmetry, enlargement, & democratization. In this light, it is asked whether current conditions of globalization even allow for the emergence of a global political community before even considering the possibility of cosmopolitan democracy. Thus, various patterns of extant supranational political community are examined to determine their impact on democratic citizenship. Four boundary regimes through which political communities can relate in a larger supranational context are identified: separate, nested, multilevel, or overlapping. It is argued that, in fact, the state system is transforming via a combination of the nested, multilevel, & overlapping patterns. In this light, the UN & EU are assessed. Focus turns to overlapping affiliations as manifest in transborder national minorities, global networks of indigenous groups, & transnational migrant communities. It is concluded that a cosmopolitan democracy might arise from this overlapping pattern of minority communities should an endogenous development of liberal norms emerge in response to challenges raised by the claims of these transnational communities' leaders. J. Zendejas

A fourth component -- cultural -- is added to T. H. Marshall's (1965) three components of citizenship: civil, political, & social. Claims for cultural citizenship rights are examined in the case of linguistic culture. These claims can be disaggregated along three axes by distinguishing between the cultural practices of religion & language & their claims, by identifying different linguistic minority categories in political communities (ie, immigrants vs national minorities), & by considering the differential application of general rights depending on context. The general principles of religious toleration are not sufficient for the demands of linguistic minorities, because language is not only for communication, but also has identity & political functions. It is argued that the claims of immigrant & national minorities are different because the right to establish a language of public life is based on claims to territorial self-government. The relationship between the underlying nation-building project & claims for self-government & language rights is discussed. Six reasons that further support making a distinction between immigrant & national minority linguistic rights are developed, including waiving cultural protection through emigration & voluntary assimilation, scarcity of resources for dispersed groups, & the special obligations toward national minorities. 54 References. M. Pflum

Explores the rise to power by Jorg Haider, leader of Austria's right-wing Freedom Party (FP), which won 27% of the vote in the 1999 elections, & later joined with the conservative People's Party to form a new government that ended dominance by the Social Democrats. The implications for foreign policy are examined, noting threats by other members of the Council of the European Union (EU) to suspend bilateral contacts with Austria. Haider has openly praised Hitler's policies & his antiimmigrant campaign focuses on ending "foreign infiltration." A discussion of various reasons offered for Haider's ascent to power suggests that, even though Austria is enjoying a boom economy, his electoral support represents a protest vote rather than endorsement of right-wing extremism. Haider professes to represent the "little man," promising to protect Austria from attacks by the outside world & to keep immigrants from taking work from natives. It is suggested that banishment from within the EU, complemented by resistance within civil society, offer the best hope for stopping Haider's ascent to full power. J. Lindroth

A federalist perspective on the secession debate challenges grievance theories that promote federal arrangements as a way to reconcile nationalist aspirations without imperiling the unity of the state. It is argued that a right to self-government can be achieved in a federal framework that views self-government by national minorities as their collective right & not simply a concession in multinational polities. The most common grievance of national minorities in multinational states is that the terms of federation are unfair or violated by the majority; therefore, it follows that national minorities are morally bound to maintain the existing state's unity if the terms of federation are fair. A description of federalism as both self-rule & shared rule is followed by an exploration of contractarian, devolution, & normative perspectives on federalism. Disputes between territorially concentrated groups over the division of political powers should be resolved by federal arrangements. It is concluded that participation in fair arrangements of federal power-sharing creates commitments toward the common good & accommodates multiple identities that help to integrate diverse societies. J. Lindroth