Michael Schudson Citizenship

Citizenship in Athens and Rome has similarities and differences. Being a citizen is being a native or naturalized member of a state or nation who owes allegiance to its government. Being a citizen meant different things in each empire. The relationship between the citizen and their nation varied from their system of citizenship. Rome had a better system of citizenship because they were more open to who they allowed citizenship, they gave people they conquered citizenship, and personal grudges, judgements about others/topics would not affect the Empire.

America — a land known for its ideals of freedom and new opportunities, a nation built under the idea that every man and women is created equal. However, the definition of what makes a person an American is entirely different from what it is that makes up America, itself. J.Hector St. John Crevecoeur, author of Letters from an American Farmer (1782), exposes what he believes makes an American. However, when compared to the standards of what makes an American in today’s world, it seems that becoming an American then was much simpler then, than it is today. The definition of an American is always evolving due to the influences of our changing nation. During a simpler time, Crevecoeur defined an American as someone of European

Freedom and citizenship are the foundational concepts of politics. However, there are disagreements among political scientists and philosophers as to how they define those concepts. This article attempts to present a short overview of the idea of freedom and citizenship from a modern political perspective. I focus on the way Thomas Jefferson and Hannah Arendt interpret those concepts and how their interpretations converse with one another.

Over the length of this course, we have discussed several aspects of politics. We have studied citizenship and obligations to society as a citizen, justice and what it means to us as individuals, and how to go about enacting change within a community and around the world. Some of the most important topics from this class included the characteristics, duties, and obligations of rulers of government. In addition to the concept of rulers, we also studied the notion of authority and the moral and metaphysical implications of authority to individuals ' autonomy. Within each concept of study, we read works from many authors with conflicting ontologies, constructed from their differing views on human nature.

According to MacIntyre (2007), the basic features of civic humanism are derived from the rise of the large-scale state and decline of the polis. This process has had immense consequences for the conceptual relation between morals and politics. The setting of the moral life is altered to become assessments of men often ruled from far off, living isolated lives in politically powerless communities. (MacIntyre, 2007. 96). It becomes imperative to encourage fellow citizens using words for them to perform actions that are

The balance between the duty of the government, both on a state and federal scale, and the citizens’ view of freedoms has been a continuous struggle throughout the readings. Although many members of America’s youth believe that their participation in politics is aimless, public opinion and voting are very important aspects of shaping the government. Without certain civil rights being granted by the government, these important rights of expression and suffrage would not exist.

The period between Reconstruction and World War I was a time of tremendous social, economic, and cultural change in the United States. The end of the Civil War, the shrinking of the frontier, the rise of immigration, and the rapid growth of industry that characterized this time period brought many issues of race, class, and status to the forefront of politics. Many different opinions came to light about what it means to be an American and the dynamic between the American individual and American society. The differing answers to these questions created both divisions and unifications between different races, classes, and political parties. Through careful analysis of historical documents from the period, it is evident that society owes all individuals basic civil rights and the ability to make a living through harnessing their skills in the workplace. Conversely, the individual owes society work that benefits society as a whole and participation in government through suffrage.

One basis of political democracy in this period was the challenge to property qualifications for voting. It began in the American Revolution but culminated in the early nineteenth century. After the Revolution, no new state required property ownership to vote, and in older states, constitutional conventions in the 1820s and 1830s abolished property qualifications, partly because the growing number of wage earners who did not own much property demanded the vote. In the South, however, where large slave owners dominated politics and distrusted mass democracy, property requirements were eliminated only gradually and disappeared quite late, by 1860. The personal independence required of the citizen was henceforth located not in owning property but in owning one’s self, a reflection of this period’s individualism.

Public debates, state militias, and committees gathered to discuss putting an end to property qualifications to be eligible to vote (108). In the 1770’s, it was essential to own land in order to have the right to vote. This goes against the original beliefs of the New World. People who started life under the King’s rule traveled to America to be free and with that, they wanted the right to vote for their “ruler”. The author of this essay notes,

Although America was beginning to become a place of freedom and liberty, it was still a topic of whether or not it was the land of the free. The nation was coming to a stage on whether or not who should be classified as an American citizen. Groups of people were being denied as citizens and couldn’t seem to meet the requirements that true Americans were labeled as. Many people were attempting to distinguish themselves as Americans, however social issues, religious oppression, and gender relations were the prominent factors in America.   Social issues contributed to the underlying paradox of freedom and liberty in America and it seemed to exclude citizens based on their ethnic background or social hierarchy.

Thomas Paine, a revolutionary, intellectual, and supporter of American independence from England published a book titled, “Rights of Man” which deals with the government shielding the natural rights of its people. Initially, the book captures the diverse aspect of this nation, but it fails to reveal the struggles that arise to preserve and adapt to such a society. Paine expresses his optimism towards the supposed perfection of American society, as one “made up...of people from different nations,” with certain expectations. Additionally, the time gap between “Rights of Man” and modern America cannot be neglected. Paine wrote during an era in which “constructing a government on the principles of society and the rights of man” was the essential objective of the country. However, modern-day America experiences opposite ideals and Paine’s theory no longer remains true because of the educational gap between the rich and poor, terrorism, and racial profiling.

In addition to defining the political units for democratic governance, nationalism can also bind citizens to a common destiny, and in doing so provide the motivation for citizens to take part in the democratic life. Much of democracy is based on the voluntary participation of citizens with a personally identification with the democratic ideals: rights, responsibility, and procedure. However, such commitment is often insufficient to inspire an

The general understanding of democracy is that it is a state of leadership where citizens of a country participate equally either directly or by representative individuals in the establishment of laws, which run the society. However, like many other forms of leadership, democracy has its cons and may not give the citizens the necessary freedoms that they think they have. Different philosophers have different insights on democracy in terms of concepts such as liberty, which they embraced. This paper will look at Benjamin Barber and Joseph Schumpeter’s idea of democracy contrasting their definition in terms of citizenship, obligation, rights and duties of each individual in the society declaring whose idea of democracy creates a compelling vision (Terchek & Conte, 2001).

    The definitions of politics and culture have changed drastically since the 17th century in Great Britain. The freedom of Americans to play an active role in politics and government greatly contrasts the role of the

The state cannot provide its services rightly in the people of the society without citizenship. It becomes a great muddle when there is no citizenship in the state. Now ,let us discuss how do I encounter state and citizenship in daily life.