Why is the UK the last country in the EU or in the parliamentary Commonwealth to have adopted citizenship teaching as compulsory in secondary education, & then only in England? There was a false dawn in the 1970s with the founding of the Politics Assoc & then the Hansard Society's program for political education which popularized the concept of "political literacy." For a while, a voluntary movement spread through schools & further education colleges but was gradually squeezed out after 1979 when the government stressed only the traditional subjects or else vocational studies in further education. It was not included in the National Curriculum of 1988. In the late 1970s, Conservative ministers began to talk of "good citizenship," meaning good behavior. But when David Blunkett, in 1998, accepted the recommendations of an advisory group chair by Bernard Crick, the animating concepts became active citizenship, participation, & empowerment. The statutory order is deliberately "light touch" & flexible. Adapted from the source document.
This essay takes stock of our editorial collaboration in the past decade and outlines those ideas that we find most promising and approaches that are most fruitful in investigating citizenship. We offer it as an agenda; not so much a dogmatic sequence of principles as an ethos toward conceiving democratic citizenship as a cosmopolitan virtue. We propose a cosmopolitan mobility tax and a cosmopolitan goods and services tax to illustrate that cosmopolitan virtue must find a practical expression. Adapted from the source document.
The idea of citizenship is widely used in daily life. 'Citizenship tests' are used to determine who can inhabit a country; 'citizen charters' have been used to prescribe levels of service provision; 'citizens' juries' are used in planning or policy enquiries; 'citizenship' lessons are taught in schools; youth organisations attempt often aim to instil 'good' citizenship; 'active citizens' are encouraged to contribute voluntary effort to their local communities and campaigners may use 'citizens' rights' to achieve their goals. What is meant by citizenship is never static and the subject of de.
Citizenship is the specifically modern form of political association. It is a juridically codified reality whose exercise reconstitutes individuals into citizens. It typically involves a connection between individuals and the nation-state in purely secular terms. Second, citizens are social selves whose conduct is motivated by norms and interests. They are the bearers of rights, whose origins, scope and consequences are the object of political contestation. Depending on concrete historical and geographical conditions, individuals qua citizens have specific sets of rights and duties. This involves a process of self-rule in which, as Quentin Skinner observes, “the sole power of making laws remains with the people or their accredited representatives, and in which all individual members of the body politic – rulers and citizens alike – remain equally subject to whatever laws they choose to impose on themselves” (Skinner, 1998: 74). Third, besides this juridical-political dimension, citizenship involves a sense of belonging to a political community: political identities are formed as citizens, through diverse forms of political socialization, come to see themselves as members of a common political body, with a shared past and future (Gutmann, 2003). These individual senses of belonging coalesce into collective understandings of what citizenship ideally entails, which are designated as “norms of citizenship” (Dalton 2008). Fourth, there are several such norms of citizenship, the origins of which can be partially traced back to the founding, constituent moments of each polity. At least, two normative axes can be distinguished. The first has a socioeconomic basis: consider the rise of post-materialist values, with a strong individualist emphasis, during the ascent of the “neo-liberal model” of state. The other normative axis refers to the distinction between ethnic-based (“thick”) versus bureaucratic-legal (“thin”) norms of citizenship. Fifth, there are several different models of citizenship as norms and interests are historically articulated in different ways in distinct contexts. These aspects of modern citizenship shape current debates over citizenship. Citizenship, however, has been a topic of concern for social scientists ever since the inception of professional social sciences.
Contemporary models of citizenship are critiqued in an attempt to conceptualize a more comprehensive notion of European citizenship. Four models of citizenship are identified: a rights-based model linked to liberalism; a duties-based model connected with conservatism; a participation-based model associated with democratic radicalism; & an identity-based model related to communitarianism. Arguing that issues of citizenship are subverted by discourses of nationalism, a postnational notion that emphasizes a citizen's rights, duties, participation, & identity is presented. In contemporary Europe, the traditional notion of citizenship based on rights & participation has been replaced by a supranational concept that privileges cultural identity of diversity. Consequently, a postnational notion of identity that reveres human rights, the environmnent, democracy, & multiculturalism is needed to contest current trends. 1 Figure, 64 References. Adapted from the source document.