Suchergebnisse

The topic of citizen-making—turning migrants into citizens—is one of the most politically contested policy areas in Europe. Access to European citizenship is governed by national law with almost no EU regulation. The Article brings to the fore normative concerns associated with citizen-making policies in Europe (Section 2). It examines ethical dilemmas involved in the process of creating new citizens (Section 3) and promotes the adoption of a European legal framework on access to citizenship (Section 4). The overall claim is that every newcomer will be required to demonstrate, as a prerequisite for citizenship, attachments to the constitution of the specific Member State, yet the test will be functional, flexible and non-exclusive. As the topic of EU citizenship law is currently at the centre of the European agenda, this article has both theoretical significance and policy implications.

First published online: 31 October 2019 ; The topic of citizen‐making—turning migrants into citizens—is one of the most politically contested policy areas in Europe. Access to European citizenship is governed by national law with almost no EU regulation. The Article brings to the fore normative concerns associated with citizen‐making policies in Europe (Section 2). It examines ethical dilemmas involved in the process of creating new citizens (Section 3) and promotes the adoption of a European legal framework on access to citizenship (Section 4). The overall claim is that every newcomer will be required to demonstrate, as a prerequisite for citizenship, attachments to the constitution of the specific Member State, yet the test will be functional, flexible and non‐exclusive. As the topic of EU citizenship law is currently at the centre of the European agenda, this article has both theoretical significance and policy implications. ; H2020 European Research Council. Grant Number: 716350

The topic of citizen-making - turning migrants into citizens - is one of the most politically contested policy areas in Europe. Access to European citizenship is governed by national law with almost no EU regulation. The Article brings to the fore normative concerns associated with citizen-making policies in Europe (Section 2). It examines ethical dilemmas involved in the process of creating new citizens (Section 3) and promotes the adoption of a European legal framework on access to citizenship (Section 4). The overall claim is that every newcomer will be required to demonstrate, as a prerequisite for citizenship, attachments to the constitution of the specific Member State, yet the test will be functional, flexible and non-exclusive. As the topic of EU citizenship law is currently at the centre of the European agenda, this article has both theoretical significance and policy implications.

This kickoff contribution argues that new conceptions of global citizenship are needed today and that new digital technologies might make them viable. Blockchain technology could provide, first, every person with a unique and internationally recognized and self-sovereign legal persona that could also serve to provide individuals globally with an equal voice in international affairs. Second, blockchain technology also permits individuals or international organisations to form cloud communities in cyberspace whose aim is political decision-making and in which individuals take part in a process of governance and the creation of law.

We can construct theoretical models of digital citizenship but, as this debate has shown, there are plenty of uncertainties – political, technological, and psychological ones – before it can become actually operative. I agree with Milan that 'much work is needed … before we can proclaim the blockchain revolution.' In particular, I share the concern about global inequality generated by ideas of cloud communities due to lack of internet access (Dzankic, Ypi, Kochenov) – this gap, however, has tremendously (and rapidly) narrowed and in 104 states more than 80 per cent of the youth population (aged 15–24) are now online. The situation will further improve if a right to internet access is universally recognised. And I cannot but share Bauböck's worries about the tyranny of the majority in the cloud – addressing it is a matter of constitutional design of voting mechanisms (note, however, that there will be judicial review, decisions that require supermajority, and perhaps even veto rights in the digital world as well). Discussing these (and others) concerns will keep theorists and policy makers busy in the years to come. While the focus of this debate is on global citizenship and virtual communities, I see it as a broader invitation to reflect on the nexus between new technologies and the future of citizenship.

Never in history has so much attention been paid to human movement. Global migration yields demographic shifts of historical significance, profoundly shaking up world politics – as shown by the "refugee crisis," the rise of White nationalism in the United States, and the spreading of the populist right in Europe. Global migration is one of the defining issues of the 21st century, challenging the fabric of Western societies, remodeling the essence of sovereignty, and changing the way we think of borders and boundaries. The article puts forward ten reasons why international migration is one of the greatest challenges of our time. The ten reasons are related to fundamental changes in the patterns of migration, in Western societies, and in the world as a whole. Indeed, migration will be at the center of world politics in the years to come.

We can construct theoretical models of digital citizenship but, as this debate has shown, there are plenty of uncertainties - political, technological, and psychological ones - before it can become actually operative. I agree with Milan that 'much work is needed … before we can proclaim the blockchain revolution.' In particular, I share the concern about global inequality generated by ideas of cloud communities due to lack of internet access (Dzankic, Ypi, Kochenov) - this gap, however, has tremendously (and rapidly) narrowed and in 104 states more than 80 per cent of the youth population (aged 15-24) are now online. The situation will further improve if a right to internet access is universally recognised. And I cannot but share Bauböck's worries about the tyranny of the majority in the cloud - addressing it is a matter of constitutional design of voting mechanisms (note, however, that there will be judicial review, decisions that require supermajority, and perhaps even veto rights in the digital world as well). Discussing these (and others) concerns will keep theorists and policy makers busy in the years to come. While the focus of this debate is on global citizenship and virtual communities, I see it as a broader invitation to reflect on the nexus between new technologies and the future of citizenship.