Spheres of Liberty, Conflict and Power: The Public Lives of Private Persons
In: Citizenship studies, Band 2, Heft 2, S. 273-289
ISSN: 1362-1025
State-society relations during the modern period reflect notions of citizenship analogous to Isaiah Berlin's (1969) concepts of positive & negative liberty. Positive citizenship, motivated by what Robert O'Brien (1997) calls "the democratic impulse," is highly participatory. The politics of 17th-century Protestant social movements constitutes one historical model to which 20th-century fundamentalist movements can be compared. Characterized by a shrinkage of the private sphere & an expansion of public life, positive citizenship emphasizes active engagement in establishing & implementing normative standards for individuals & communities & control of the state for virtuous ends. Negative citizenship concentrates on the protection of individual rights, expanding both the private sphere & a third, or meta-, space that evinces qualities of public & private realm simultaneously. The historical model presented is what Jurgen Habermas (1991) has called the "bourgeois public sphere," a quasi-parallel polis from within which critics of state power assert their right to resist & organize their capacity to repel attempts to enforce standards of public virtue however arrived at. These ideal types are compared to different scenarios of state-society relations to analyze the likely impact on public & private life of rapid globalization. 64 References. Adapted from the source document.