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.
A significant addition to the growing body of literature in the field, this wide-ranging overview explores the important role of citizenship in the world's liberal democracies and how it is evolving. Long a neglected topic in the social sciences, citizenship is now at the forefront of scholarly discussions on democracy worldwide. In an increasingly global society, constructive dialogue on various themes shaping citizenship studies is indispensable. Citizenship: Discourse, Theory, and Transnational Prospects reviews the four broadly conceived themes that shape contemporary citizenship - inclusi.
"This meticulously researched study provides a much-needed historical perspective on contemporary debates about immigration and the nature of citizenship. By tracing the origins of citizenship in four Western countries - Britain, France, Germany and the United States - from c. 1700 to the present, Andreas Fahrmeir demonstrates the contingency and changeability of the concept
Der Verfasser plädiert für eine Umstellung des Konzepts "citizenship" vom Einheitskonzept "full membership" auf eine differenzierungstheoretische Perspektive der sozialen Positionierung von Menschen in der modernen Gesellschaft. Ausgehend von der funktionalen wie segmentären Differenzierung der modernen Gesellschaft konzipiert er citizenship einerseits als spezifisch politische Mitgliedschaft (Staatsangehörigkeit) und andererseits als citizenship rights. Diese citizenship rights erfüllen innerhalb eines Staatsterritoriums die Funktion, diverse soziale Partizipationen zu ermöglichen oder zu fördern. Anknüpfend an Marshall werden hier bürgerliche Freiheitsrechte, politische Souveränitätsrechte und soziale Teilhaberechte unterschieden. (ICE2)