Suchergebnisse

Although the concept of citizenship is a widely used theoretical framework within political philosophy, its use in the field of mental health remains underexplored. Within this context, citizenship emphasises the social inclusion and participation of people who are marginalized and offers a more social and relational view of services and support for people with mental health problems than has been common in mental health systems of care. At the same time, however, the citizenship approach has operated in the context of systems of care in the United States that favour highly individualized conceptions of, and approaches to, care, and these systems of care operate in the social and political context of highly individualized concepts of the citizen. In this article building on the work of other citizenship scholars, we argue that a collective form of citizenship, grounded in the 5Rs framework, holds the individual and collective in creative tension. Furthermore, the paper applies this model to the domain of mental health, where people are treated in individualistic ways and experience marginalisation, making the collective dimension imperative and promoting participation, empowerment and the contribution for social change to people with mental health problems. Our theoretical framework of collective citizenship, while geared toward the needs of persons with mental health problems, also contributes to recent citizenship theory on the inclusion of marginalized, stigmatised, and excluded groups. We illustrate the application of this approach through an ethnographic participant observation case study of a collective citizenship group with which we are associated.

Lectures delivered on the Stevenson foundation, in the University of Glasgow, during the spring and autumn of 1922.- ; Bibliography: p. [223]-227. ; Bibliography: p.[223]-227. ; The statement of the problem -- Other ideals of conduct -- Liberty, equality and fraternity -- The state as means -- The state as end-- The state as personality -- Citizenship and empire -- Internationalism and cosmopolitanism -- Education in citizenship -- De civitate Dei ; Mode of access: Internet.

Since the 1990s, citizenship has been transformed into an anthropological genre. Anthropologists have employed terms such as "transnational," "insurgent," and "patriotic" to describe the subjective, cultural, and political dimensions of citizenship. Anthropologists have also differentiated between formal and substantive, legal and cultural, and full and partial citizenship to theorize the disjunction between the promise of state-granted rights and everyday experiences of belonging to a nation-state. And, with increasing mobilities, anthropologists have reconceptualized the politics of exclusion that underlies state policies aimed at undocumented migrants. Now more than ever, anthropology is needed in the study of citizenship and noncitizenship both to illuminate the particulars of how social actors navigate national belonging and to rescue citizenship from state policies aimed at exclusion, death, and the diminution of rights.

This Article takes up the question of "who counts?" with a three-part argument. The first part of the argument makes the case that citizenship in liberal democracies is subject to stresses caused by internal doctrinal conflict that result in the creation of semi-citizenship statuses that offer some individuals partial bundles of rights and semi-citizen statuses. Semi-citizenship is inevitable. The second part of the argument looks closely at how this affects the distribution of the political rights of citizenship: voting and representation. I make the argument that we ought not conflate voting and representation. Each is a distinct political right. People who cannot vote or do not vote are not necessarily entirely unrepresented. This is particularly evident if one takes seriously the trustee model of representation. The third part of the Article compares three different cases of semi-citizenship in which groups who are counted for the purposes of the census and legislative apportionment are not accorded the vote. I examine the cases of children, non-citizens, and felons, briefly illustrating how and why trusteeship serves the first two groups and fails the third. These conclusions bolster the case for treating trusteeship as a necessary component of a liberal democratic state and for treating it skeptically in circumstances in which the trusteeship is not clearly linked to the political capabilities of the population in question.

Purpose: This paper introduces Stroud's 'Linguistic Citizenship', a concept committed to democratic participation, to voice, to the heterogeneity of linguistic resources and to the political value of sociolinguistic understanding. Approach: It first outlines Linguistic Citizenship's links with the ethnographic sociolinguistics inspired by Hymes, and then turns to language and language education in England. Findings: The discourses of language and citizenship currently dominating the UK are very much at odds with Stroud's conception, but the sociolinguistic citizenship outlined by Stroud is very well suited to the multilingualism of everyday urban life, and it complements a range of relatively small, independently funded educational initiatives promoting similar values. Their efforts are currently constrained by issues of scale and sustainability, although there was a period from the 1960s to the 80s when sociolinguistic citizenship was addressed within English state schooling. Practical implications: Sociolinguistic citizenship may at present find its most sustainable support in the collaboration between universities and not-for-pro.

Using the distinction that Richard Ashley and Rob Walker drew in 1990 between two possible critical responses to crisis and the question of sovereignty, this article argues that two strands of thought can be identified, each producing a different understanding of what it means to become a citizen in Ireland. One strand articulates citizenship in terms of sovereign autonomous subjectivity, and thus in terms of horizontal or territorial relations between here and there, us and them, inside and outside. The other strand (re)articulates citizenship in terms of ambiguous paradoxical subjectivity that challenges the modern framing of the politics of citizenship as necessarily needing to be conceptualized in terms of absolute space. This divergence is explored through the 2004 Irish Citizenship Referendum. The concept of citizenship as "trace" is introduced in an attempt to capture how citizenship is reconceptualized differently in the second strand. It is argued that understanding this divergence is necessary in order to consider how classical conceptions of time and space are specifically integral to structures of sovereign power and how perspectives that take these as their starting point fail to account for the increasing emphasis on the nonsovereign manner in which citizenship is being experienced vis-à-vis migration.

Most critical analyses assess citizenship-deprivation policies against international human rights and domestic rule of law standards, such as prevention of statelessness, non-arbitrariness with regard to justifications and judicial remedies, or non-discrimination between different categories of citizens. This report considers instead from a political theory perspective how deprivation policies reflect specific conceptions of political community. We distinguish four normative conceptions of the grounds of membership in a political community that apply to decisions on acquisition and loss of citizenship status: i) a 'State discretion' view, according to which governments should be as free as possible in pursuing State interests when determining citizenship status; ii) an 'individual choice' view, according to which individuals should be as free as possible in choosing their citizenship status; iii) an 'ascriptive community' view, according to which both State and individual choices should be minimised through automatic determination of membership based on objective criteria such as the circumstances of birth; and iv) a 'genuine link' view, according to which the ties of individuals to particular States determine their claims to inclusion and against deprivation while providing at the same time objections against including individuals without genuine links. We argue that most citizenship laws combine these four normative views in different ways, but that from a democratic perspective the 'genuine link' view is normatively preferable to the others. The report subsequently examines five general grounds for citizenship withdrawal – threats to public security, non-compliance with citizenship duties, flawed acquisition, derivative loss and loss of genuine links – and considers how the four normative views apply to withdrawal provision motivated by these concerns. The final section of the report examines whether EU citizenship provides additional reasons for protection against Member States' powers of citizenship deprivation. We suggest that, in addition to fundamental rights protection through EU law and protection of free movement rights, three further arguments could be invoked: toleration of dual citizenship in a political union, prevention of unequal conditions for loss among EU citizens, and the salience of genuine links to the EU itself rather than merely to one of its Member States.

'Republican' and 'citizen', in fact, are old and intertwined words - so old that some may wonder at their relevance in the brave new world of the twenty-first century, and so intertwined that the phrase 'republican citizenship' seems almost redundant to others. There is no republic without citizens, after all; and, according to the classical republican thinkers, there is no citizenship, in the full sense of the word, except among those who are fortunate enough to inhabit a republic. But this view of citizenship's connection to republicanism no longer seems to prevail. If it did, there would be no need for a chapter on republican citizenship in this volume of essays on citizenship, for the authors would simply assume that citizenship entails republicanism and go on to other matters. There might also be no need for this chapter if it were not for the revival of scholarly interest in republicanism in recent years. Such a revival has definitely occurred, though, and occurred simultaneously with a renewed interest in citizenship. This coincidence suggests that republican citizenship is well worth our attention, not only for purposes of historical understanding but also as a way of thinking about citizenship in the twenty-first century. Why this revival has occurred and whether republican citizenship truly offers anything of relevance or value today are thus the subjects of this chapter.

Various adjustments regarding citizenship law regulations in Indonesia still do not provide accommodation for all citizens. After the enactment of Law Number 12 of 2006 concerning Citizenship, there was pressure from the Indonesian diaspora to implement dual citizenship. This urge received a rejection from other citizens because it endangered security, economy, politics and questioned loyalty as a citizen. This study aims to examine in the literature the differences in paradigms of globalist and nationalist groups in Indonesia and the reality that occurs in other countries regarding dual citizenship. The study uses a qualitative approach with a literature study to examine the issue of dual citizenship in Indonesia and compare the development of dual citizenship in other countries. The results showed that the debate on the dual citizenship paradigm is in the material and immaterial debates. The group that supports dual citizenship wants distributive justice in terms of material (economics) for those who live abroad. In contrast, the opposing group wants to maintain immaterial aspects. (identity, culture, and ideology). This situation makes Indonesia unable to fully implement dual citizenship. Besides that, Law Number 12 of 2006 concerning citizenship at the beginning of its formation was intended to prevent apatride and bipatride. On this basis, recommendations for stakeholders related to dual citizenship need to be careful in making policies, being able to accommodate the various wishes of citizens, as well as further reviewing the legal and social impacts caused when implementing dual citizenship in Indonesia. ; Berbagai penyesuaian mengenai peraturan hukum kewarganegaraan di Indonesia masih belum memberikan akomodasi pada semua warga negara. Pasca disahkan Undang-Undang Nomor 12 Tahun 2006 tentang Kewarganegaraan, muncul desakan dari diaspora Indonesia untuk diterapkannya kewarganegaraan ganda. Desakan tersebut mendapatkan penolakan dari warga negara lain, karena membahayakan keamanan, ekonomi, politik, dan ...

Citizenship information is information produced by or about national and local government, government departments and public sector organisations which may be of value to the citizen either as part of everyday life or in the participation by the citizen in government and policy formulation. This report describes a research project, funded by the British Library Research and Innovation Centre, which investigated the extent to which members of the UK public have expressed or unexpressed needs for citizenship information, their preferred routes to the acquisition of such information, and the suitability and approachability of the public library, among other agencies, for the user seeking citizenship information. The key elements of the project were: a national survey of almost 1,300 users of public libraries, Citizens Advice Bureaux and other information and advice agencies; another national survey, this time by personal doorstep interview, of almost 900 members of the UK public; a series of 9 focus group discussions with representatives of various sectors or interest groups, such as libraries, CABx and other information and advice agencies. The report discusses the background to the research, as well as the project methodology and major findings. The project found clear evidence that the public encounter situations in which information is required to help solve problems, and that they feel that access to information and freedom of information are very important to them in exercising their rights as citizens. The great majority of respondents saw public libraries as their preferred option in seeking citizenship information, although there were still areas of concern in that there was evidence to show that certain groups, such as disabled people and jobseekers, are less willing to use libraries. There was also a clear emphasis on public libraries as an appropriate location for computerised access to citizenship information, although other public places such as post offices and shopping centres would also attract a ...

By what standard of proof-—and by what procedures—-can the U.S. government challenge citizenship status? That question has taken on greater urgency in recent years. News reports discuss cases of individuals whose passports were suddenly denied, even after the government had previously recognized their citizenship for years or even decades. The government has also stepped up efforts to reevaluate the naturalization files of other citizens and has asked for funding to litigate more than a thousand denaturalization cases. Likewise, citizens have gotten swept up in immigration enforcement actions, and thousands of citizens have been erroneously detained or removed from the United States. Most scholarly treatment of citizenship rights has focused on the substantive protection of those rights. But the procedures by which citizenship cases are litigated are just as important—and sometimes more important—to ensure that citizenship rights are safe. This Article analyzes the due process implications of citizenship litigation in the United States. It examines different stages at which the citizenship question is judicially resolved, including denaturalization, removal and exclusion, and restrictions on the exercise of citizenship rights such as voting, working, and traveling. The Article concludes that the structure of U.S. democracy relies on the stability of citizenship and requires heightened procedural protections when the government challenges an individual's citizenship. In the words of Justice Frankfurter, "The history of liberty has largely been the history of observance of procedural safeguards." Those procedural safeguards are needed to ensure that the judicial branch can remain the stalwart protector of a key pillar of our constitutional democracy.

International audience ; The notion of civic agency gains relevance in the discussions about declining participation in democracy. This article argues that we need to take a 'cultural turn' in our understanding of such agency, seeing citizenship not just in formal terms but also in regard to meaning, practices, communication and identities. It pulls together various strands of thought that are helpful in conceptualizing civic agency, first from the republican conception of democracy, and then from perspectives on civil society. Thereafter it focuses on public spheres and the civic competencies associated with them, particularly the communicative variety. Finally, it critically addresses the notion of deliberative democracy, a concept that has come to signal the mode of communicative interaction of the public sphere, and suggests that this view of civic communication ignores a number of important issues in regard to the cultural aspects of civic competence.

The concept of environmental citizenship is employed as an analytical tool to determine what kind of climate citizenship(s) the citizen-directed material in the European Commission's climate change campaign is constructing. The research material is read, analysed and interpreted through elements attached to environmental citizenship: the realm of activity, political space, depth of activity, level of activity, citizen virtues, citizen rights and responsibilities and conception of the environment. The results suggest that climate citizenship is considered mainly as a private sphere activity performed by individuals and consists mainly in small adjustments in daily life. Climate citizens are motivated to everyday-life mitigation by personal benefit, greenhouse gas emissions and preserving natural resources.

Mutations in citizenship are crystallized in an ever-shifting landscape shaped by the flows of markets, technologies, and populations. We are moving beyond the citizenship-versus-statelessness model. First, the elements of citizenship (rights, entitlements, etc.) are becoming disarticulated from each other, and becoming re-articulated with universalizing criteria of neoliberalism and human rights. Such 'global assemblages' define zones of political entitlements and claims. Second, the space of the 'assemblage', rather than the national terrain, becomes the site for political mobilizations by diverse groups in motion. Three contrasting configurations are presented. In the EU zone, unregulated markets and migrant flows challenge liberal citizenship. In Asian zones, foreigners who display self-enterprising savoire faire gain rights and benefits of citizenship. In camps of the disenfranchised or displaced, sheer survival becomes the ground for political claims. Thus, particular constellations shape specific problems and resolutions to questions of contemporary living, further disarticulating and deterritorializing aspects of citizenship.

In Scandinavia the Normalization principle has had great influence on social services for people with cognitive disabilities. The principle refers to the idea and overall goal that the living conditions of people with cognitive disabilities should be as close as possible to the mainstream of society and that people with cognitive disabilities should have the same rights as all other citizens. However, the political landscape is changing and over the past two decades social policy in Europe has increased the focus on cost-effectiveness and economic and social outcomes. Active welfare state reforms have been implemented in most European countries with the main aim of combatting unemployment – partly by reducing social benefits to increase incentives to take up work, and partly by introducing various forms of activation aiming to improve the employability of unemployed individuals. Originally these reforms were targeting unemployed groups with no problems besides not having a job, but over the years individuals with severe disabilities and health problems have also been included as target groups, and activation policies have gradually permeated the field of social policy. The reforms lay stress on improving the disabled individuals' workability and increase sanctions and the threat of sanctions if the disabled individual is not making suitable efforts to improve his or her situation. Yet, little knowledge exists on what this means for social work with individuals with cognitive disabilities, who are too disabled to respond to financial incentives and are unable to develop sufficient workability, and what the consequences are for these groups. In this presentation we will analyze the consequences of active welfare state reforms and the political focus on effectiveness in social services for individuals with cognitive disabilities in Denmark. Based on policy analysis of the Danish reforms and drawing on qualitative and quantitative empirical results from three recent Ph.D. dissertations, we will discuss the transitions in the living conditions for people with cognitive disabilities. More specifically, how the possibilities of social citizenship becomes contingent, when active welfare state reforms are implemented and when 'being active' – formally or informally – becomes the condition for receiving financial and social support. The findings from the dissertations show that when 'activity' and supporting development of a particular 'active behavior' among individuals with cognitive disabilities becomes the aim of social work, care and equal dignity for people who depend on assistance are left in the background. Thus, despite the aim of inclusion, the efforts to 'activate' those unable to engage in paid work and 'a normal everyday life' have had counterproductive consequences, when it comes to social marginalization and social citizenship, in particular for adults with cognitive disabilities.