Global Citizenship †Towards a Definition

orbiculate Citizenship Towards a Definition Taso G. Lagos secure nurtureed under Taso G. Lagos. Permission to cite should be directed to the author. Abstract Global protest operation is on the chute. Demonstrations in Seattle in 1999, Genoa in 2001 and in dozens of otherwise sites brought activists unneurotic from around the humanityly concern and localized globular issues in unprecedented ways. These and other activities suggest the possibility of an emerging ball-shaped citizenry. Individuals from a wide variety of nations, both in the North and South, move across boundaries for various activities and reasons.This trans guinea pig action mechanism is facilitated by the festering ease of belong and by communication fostered by the Internet and telephony. spot it is threatening to quantify these numbers, or to give reality(prenominal) citizens a legally defined governmental status, these qualifications do non obviate the existence and influence of transnational activists seeking new institutional forms in an interdependent beingness. We get word globular citizens as active political, social, environmental or economic agents in an interdependent area in which new institutional forms beyond nations argon beginning to emerge.Introduction By itself, citizenship has certain legal and democratic overt adepts. Conceptually, it is enwrapped up in rights and stipulations, and in owing allegiance to a self-reliant affirm whose causality is bear by the citizenry yet with rights that be shared by all outgrowths of that state. We distinguish citizen from national or subject, the latter twain implying protection of a state. Citizenship, as it has add together down to us via the ancient Greeks and Romans, via the Enlightenment, and the American and French Revolutions, is tied into the emergence of members of a commandment with specified privileges and duties.To spill of a citizen is thus to speak of individuals with distinct kinds to the state, along with the social status and power these relationships imply. The lift the citizen concept into the world(a) sphere presents difficulties, non least(prenominal) of which is that orbicular citizens are not legal members in good standing with a sovereign state. More importantly, there are no recognizable privileges and duties associated with the concept that would envelop global citizenship with the status and power (in an ideal world) currently associated with national citizenship.Since modern nation-states are the repositories and main converseion of citizenship, discussion of global citizenship necessarily dictates an existence outdoors the consistency politic as we know it. If we follow Prestons (1997) stupefy of citizenship (who belongs to the polity, how the members of the polity in general are regarded and how they exercise power), then global citizenship cannot be expressed in any legal sense. It is, however, expressed in other ways that whitethorn have a meaningful and profound tint on the development of civic engagement and citizen-state relations.Three examples are worth mentioning. Since January 1, 2000, negotiations amongst WTO member states regarding the individual(a) road of professionals to and from member countries has taken place, under the General Agreement on Trade in Services, Article XIX. plot of ground this does not signal de facto recognition of trans-national citizens, it whitethorn indicate halting steps toward it. This is all the more meaning(a) given that around the globe there is greater and easier movement of goods than human beings.The European Community has taken halting steps to qualifying this it allows the free movement of its piles to live, work, pay taxes and, significantly, to vote in other member states. Habermas (1994) notes this as a utilitarian model that may have greater implications than merely for Europeans it is possible the model may be expanded in other regions of the world, or t o the entire world itself. The ability of a Spaniard to pick up and move to Ger umpteen and be a citizen there indicates that notions of ties a country of origin may weaken.The Spaniard may be quite happy spirit in Germany and not wish to go underpin to Spain. Is she still a Spaniard, a German, or now a global citizen? Finally, there is the rising flow of individuals with more than one passport. Where once the U. S. State De contributionment frowned on its citizens carrying more than one passport, the reality is that instantly that it is turning a blind eye. (In war, this may change). Many immigrants to the U. S. in the 1990s, a decade that saw the largest influx of newcomers to the state, came to work but still retained their old passports.While many immigrants permanently stay in the U. S. , many others either go back to the old country, or operate back and forth. If not global citizens, what check do we give them? T. H. Mars student residence (1949), in his classic study o n citizenship, noted that citizenship as it arose in occidental liberal democracies has both positive and negative connotations. In the positive sense, citizenship is an expression of activism on the part of citizens in its negative quality, it is the freedom from bureaucratic control and intervention.If his theory is true, where does global citizenship fit into it? Very nicely it would seem. A visible expression of global citizenship is the many global activists who debuted spectacularly at the competitiveness in Seattle. These protestors continue to carry on in other venues, much(prenominal) as at meetings for the orbit strand and the IMF, and most recently at the Summit of the Americas in Quebec City. Other activists fight for environmental protection, human rights to the necessitous and the unrepresented, and for restrictions on the use of nuclear power and nuclear weapons.Freedom from bureaucratic intervention seems to be a authentication of global citizenship the overl eap of a world body to sanction and protect these citizens in addition means to a certain degree freedom from bureaucratic control. To return to our Spaniard, how much control does Spain exercise over her when she lives in Germany? Towards a Definition Since global citizens are not recognized legally, their existence may be ruff represented as associatively. 1. Global citizenship is less defined by legal sanction than by associational status that is different from national citizenship.Since there is no global bureaucracy to give sanction and protect global citizens, and despite intriguing models suggested by the EU, global citizenship remains the purview of individuals to live, work and play indoors trans-national norms and status that defy national boundaries and sovereignty. Assocational status in this realm does double duty. It serves to explain a rummy characteristic of global citizenship while it also expresses that particular lighthouse of post-modernity known as lifestyl e politics. (Giddens, 1991, Bennett, 2000, et al) Steenbergen (1994) so far comes closest to explaining this relationship betwixt global citizenry and lifestyle politics as more sociological in composition. Rather than a technical definition of a citizen on his or her relationship to the state (p. 2), Steenbergen suggests that the global citizen represents a more wholistic version you choose where you work, live or play, and therefore are not tied down to your belt down of birth. The greater number of prime(a)s offered by modern life (from consumer roducts to politics) lies at the root of lifestyle politics. (Franck, 1999) As Falk (1994) put it, in global citizenship there is the rudimentary institutional reflection of arenas and allegiance what many persons are really identifying with as no longer bounded by or centred upon the formal relationship that an individual has to his or her own territorial society as embodied in the form of a state. Traditional citizenship is being c hallenged and remoulded by the important activism associated with this trans-national political and social evolution. 1994 138) Traditional ties between citizen and the state are withering, and are re situated by more fragmented loyalties that explain lifestyle politics. Notions of ties between citizen and state that arose in the aftermath of the American and French Revolution, and the creation of the modern state after the 18th century no longer hold sway. It is not by coincidence, for example, that the first to receive the enfranchisement were adult males who also happened to serve in American and French armies. (Kaspersen, 1998) The citizen army directly is replaced by the professional army, and a key cog in the bonds between state and citizen removed.Voting turnout decreases, and the public has low regard for politicians. With such slow down ties between citizen and state, does the emergence of global citizenship seem farfetched? Many of newly emerging global citizens are ac tively engaged in global efforts whether in business ventures, environmentalism, concern for nuclear weapons, health or immigration problems. Rather than citizenship, being the upshot of rights and obligations granted by a central authority, the lack of such authority gives primacy to the global citizens themselves not a top-down but a down-up scenario. . While various types of global citizens exist, a common thread to their emergence is their base in grassroots activism. We may identify different types of global citizens, yet many of these categories are best summarized by their emergence despite a lack of any global governing body. It is as if they have spontaneously erupted of their own volition. Falk (1994) identified five categories of global citizens which he named as, global reformers elite global business people global environmental managers politically cognizant regionalists trans-national activistsWith the exception of global business people, the other categories h ave grassroots activism at their core. i If the Battle in Seattle is an applicable demonstration, these activists are responsible for their own activism rather than granted by an institution. This earmarks global citizenship as qualitatively different from the national variety, where rights and obligations came (even when fought and protested for) at the behest and generosity of the state. With global citizenship, individuals exercise communicational and organizational tools such as the Internet to make themselves global citizens.No government sanctioned this development. None, it seems, could. Jacobson (1996) noted this fracture of the state as dispenser of citizen rights and obligations, although he sees the decline of overall citizenship as a result. Keck and Sikkink (1998) on the other hand, regard such global activism as a possible new engine of civic engagement. These global activists, or cosmopolitan fraternity of individuals (p. 213) as they call them, transcend national bo rders and skillfully use nip tactics against both government and private corporations that make them viable actors on the merging global public sphere. A striking example of this pressure is the rise-publicized anti-sweatshop campaign against Nike. Literally dozens of websites are devoted to exposing Nikes labor practices in manufacturing shoes in overseas factories. In 1996, with the aid of Global Exchange, a humanitarian organization that later helped to organize the Battle in Seattle, Nikes labor practices became the subject of increase mainstream media attention. In the process, Nike was linked to sweatshop labor, a label it has tested to shed ever since.Is the Internet central in the development of these emerging global activists? The Internet and other technologies such as the cell phone play an instrumental role in the development of global activists, as do easy and cheap air travel and the wide use and acceptance of assent cards. But there are other forces at work decline in civic engagement, rise of lifestyle politics, homogenization of products, conglomeration in media systems and communicational tools that let us know more some each other than ever before.Add to the mix the rising concern for universal human rights and for trans-global problems such as environmental degradation and global warming, the result is a landscape that tends to be more global than national. This is not the first time in the history of our civilization that society has been internationalized, but never has it been easier for average citizen to express herself in this globalized fashion by the clothes she wears, soda she drinks, music she listens to (e. g. world music) and vacation land she visits.It is increasingly obvious that our identities, as Lie and Servaes (2000) and Scammell (2001) suggest, are tied to our roles as citizens. Scammells citizen-consumers vote with their purchases and are engaged in their communities to the extent they have the freedom to shop. Enga gement, in this modern sense, is as audience members at a play clapping at the high points of drama. Can we say this is true of global citizenship? The express is scanty to make such judgment if global activists are replaced by global citizens-consumers the sea change will be complete. 3. Global citizens may redefine ties between civic engagement and geography.The town hall meetings of New England and other regions of the U. S. seem increasingly supplanted by electronic spheres not limited by musculus quadriceps femoris and time. This heralds a potentially startling new mechanism in participatory democracy. If we return to the Spaniard living in Germany, what can we say about the geography of community? An output of modernity is greater and greater choice placed upon the individual the social networks and systems that suited hundreds if not thousands of generations are breaking down in raise of personal choice and individual responsibility.No longer do we unaccompanied rely on t he social bulwarks of the prehistorical the family, the community, the nation. Life is continually being personalized. Can the Spaniard still be called one while living in Germany? Absentee ballots opened up the way for expatriates to vote while living in another country. The Internet may carry this several steps further. Voting is not limited by time or station you can be anywhere in the world and still make voting decisions back home. more or less of our nations history has been bound up in equating geography with sovereignty. It did matter where you lived, worked, played.Since travel was expensive and cumbersome, our lives were tied to geography. No longer can we entirely make this claim. Thompson (1996), writing in the Stanford fairness Review, suggests that we can do away with residency and voting in local elections. Frug (1996) even suggests that alienation in the way we regard our geography already creates a disconnect between it and sovereignty. If we are not entirely home at home, do boundaries make any difference anymore? This is not just an academician question, but one rife with rich and disheartening social and political possibilities. Global citizens float within, outside and through these boundaries.The implications seem significant. Many elements seem to spawn global citizenship, but one is noteworthy in this discussion the continuous tension that globalization has unleashed between various forces local, national and global. An interesting paradox of globalization is while the world is being internationalized at the same time its also being localized. The world shrinks as the local community (village, town, city) takes on greater and greater magnificence. Mosco (1999) noted this feature and saw the growing importance of technopoles, or high-technologized city-states that hark back to classical Greece.If this trend is true, and I believe it is, then it seems global citizens are the glue that may hold these bankrupt entities together. Pu t another way, global citizens are people that can travel within these various layers or boundaries and somehow still make sense of the world. 4. each rights and obligations conformanceed to the global citizen come from the citizens themselves, growing public estimate for universal rights, the rise of people migrating around the world, and an increasing vogue to standardize citizenship.Difference may exist on the cultural level, but in bureaucracies, increasing favor is placed on uniformity. Efficiency and utilitarianism lie at the core of capitalism naturally a world that lives under its aegis replicates these tendencies. Postal agreements, civil air travel and other inter-governmental agreements are but one small example of standardization that is increasingly moving into the arena of citizenship. The concern is raised that global citizenship may be closer to a consumer model than a legal one. The lack of a world body puts the initiative upon global citizens themselves to crea te rights nd obligations. Rights and obligations as they arose at the formation of nation-states (e. g. the right to vote and obligation to serve in time of war) are at the verge of being expanded. So new concepts that accord certain human rights which arose in the 20th century are increasingly being universalized across nations and governments. This is the result of many factors, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the United Nations in 1948, the aftermath of orb struggle II and the Holocaust and growing sentiments towards legitimizing marginalized peoples (e. . pre-industrialized peoples found in the jungles of Brazil and Borneo). Couple this with growing awareness of our species impact on the environment, and there is the rising feeling that citizen rights may extend to include the right to dignity and self-determination. If national citizenship does not foster these new rights, then global citizenship seems more accessible to them. One cannot overestimate th e importance of the rise of human rights discourse within the radar of public opinion. What are the rights and obligations of human beings trapped in conflicts?Or, incarcerated as part of ethnic cleansing? Equally striking, are the pre-industrialized tribes newly discovered by scientists living in the depths of dense jungle? Leary (1999), Heater (1999) and Babcock (1994) tend to equate these rights with the rise of global citizenship as prescriptive associations, indicating a national citizenship model that is more closed and a global citizenship one that is more elastic and inclusive. If true, this places a strain in the relationship between national and global citizenship.Boli (1998) tends to see this strain as mutually beneficial, whereas Leary (1999) and McNeely (1998) regard the rupture between the two systems as merely evolutionary rather than combative. same much of social change, changing scopes of modern citizenship tend to be played out in both large and minute spheres. Habermas (1994) tends to place global citizenship in a larger, social context, arguing that nation-states can be central engines of citizenship but culture can also be a powerful spurt.He regards the formation of the European citizen as a kind of natural epiphany of governmental conglomeration within the forces of globalization, only remotely alluding to the somatic conglomeration that has been both the recipient and cause of worldwide economic expansion. Others, including Iyer (2000) see globalization and global citizens as direct descendents of global standardization, which he notes, for instance, in the growing homogeneity of airports. Standardization and modernity have worked together for the past few centuries.Ellul (1964), Mumford (1963) and other scholars attack this as a form of oppression, in the same nervure that Barber (1996) saw the proliferation of carbon-copy fast-food chains around the globe. Why not a set of basic citizen rights followed the world over? 5. Global citizenship may be the indirect result of Pax Americana. The 20th century, as well as the 21st, may be a time dominated by the United States. Americas domination of the WTO, IMF, World Bank and other global institutions creates feelings of imperialism among lesser nations.Cross national cooperation to counter American ascendency may result in more global citizens. If economic, environmental, political and social factors push towards more global citizenry, we must also within this camp consider the ramifications of the post cold war world, or realpolitik. Modifying marshalls metaphor, we may ask if global citizenship is not a response to the changing factors and response against American domination? In the embodied world, conglomeration leads to larger and larger companies who merge to effectively work against other mega corporations. The evolution of the UnitedStates of Europe (in theory if not in practice) is in a similar vein a reaction to the dominating power of the U. S. Other regional alliances may yet emerge. Within such trans-national ties may emerge greater acceptance of one anothers citizens, emulating the European model which Habermas, Bellamy (2000), and others so favor. These alliances may provide the bureaucratic backbone to make global citizenry about more than just lifestyles or personal politics. This development would also change the definition of national citizenry global citizens may come to favor their status over those who have no such designation.Worse, there may emerge two tracks of citizenship national and global, with the latter being more prestigious. Along with greater separation between rich and poor, meliorate and not, there would also be those relegated to living out their entire lives in one land, compared to those who freely travel to many. The darker aspects of this are not hard to miss. Clarkes (1996) contention that citizenship tends to be more exclusive than inclusive would be borne out. Rather than McNeelys (1998) flexib le citizenship, or Prestons (1997) multiple loyalty model, we get two separate tracks of citizenship that respond to prestige, wealth and power.Global citizens may be so favored that nations fight to attract them to their land, similar to todays fight for corporate sites. Conclusion To concretize what appears an amorphous concept global citizenship presents dangers, not least of which is the tendency towards speculation. Spending some time at an airport, especially one of the many airline commonplace flyer lounges, reveals that global citizens exist and are a growing number. Within my own Greek immigrant community in Seattle, for example, there are several Greeks who split the year living between Greece and the U.S. I am hard pressed to call them either Greeks or Americans, since they do not fit neatly into either category (not that most ever do). Higher living standards than ever before in civilizations history allow these dualities to exist. Increasingly, we put them into the c amp of global citizenship. Capitalism, and the consumeristic child it has spawned, is particularly good at religious offering choices, and global citizenship may obviously be another facet of this tendency, or what Bennett (unpublished, 2001) and other allude to as lifestyle politics.Any discussion on global citizenship thus must take into account the changing political climate of a globalized world. Scholars have already noted the emerging power struggle between corporations and global activists who increasingly see the nexus of de facto governance taking place more and more within the corporate world (and as mediated by communication technologies like the Internet) and not in the halls of representative government. Hence, the tendency on the part of activists to promote rallies and events like the protests at WTO, as more effective means of citizen intimacy and democratic accountability.The rise of security concerns as a result of the terrorist attacks of September 11 have par ticularly both grown the importance of national states as well fostered more internationalism. U. S. President George W. Bush who during his election had difficulty remembering the names of heads of states has suddenly transformed into an internationalist with deep concerns for the affairs of other states. While this may be a temporary event with political overtones, the events of 9/11 suggest that the world has become more international than ever before.Whether global citizenship will follow in its wake is problematical. It is simply too early to tell. The role that global citizenship plays in this changing political landscape is a squa shy one. Yet the fact that there is a growing body of global citizens and their influence is increasingly felt on the worlds political stage indicates the need to observe and study these individuals in earnest. The exertion to begin developing a definition of global citizenship is a small step towards understanding their bearing and influence bet ter. iA case can be made to add academics, sports and artists in categories, but I shy away from this since their overall numbers tend to be small, if not limited. The world it seems can only yield so many traveling artists and sport stars, and so a ceiling may be placed on their populations. Also, some concern is raised here regarding other globalists, such as those working for the UN, for example, but again, I tend to shy away from their categorization since their numbers can never expand beyond a limited population (given the resources of the organization, etc. . But with Falks categories, in theory, their numbers are unlimited and therefore more tenable to categorize. Bibliography Babcock, Rainer, Transnational Citizenship (1994 Edward Elgar, Aldershot, England) Bauman, Zygmunt, Intimations of postmodernity (1992 Routledge, London) Bellamy, Richard, Citizenship beyond the nation state the case of Europe, from Political guess in Transition, edited by Noel OSullivan (2000 Rout ledge, London) Bennett, W.Lance, News the Politics of Illusion (1996 Longman, New York) Bennett, W. Lance, Consumerism and Global Citizenship life-style Politics, Permanent Campaigns, and International Regimes of Democratic Accountability. Unpublished paper presented at the International Seminar on Political Consumerism, capital of Sweden University, May 30, 2001.Best, Steven & Kellner, Douglas, The Postmodern Turn (1997 Guilford Press, New York) Boli, John, Rights and Rules Constituting World Citizens in Public Rights, Public Rules Constituting Citizens in the World Polity and National Policy, edited by Connie L McNeely (1998 Garland, New York) Clarke, Paul Berry, Deep Citizenship ( 1996 Pluto Press, London) Eriksen, Erik & Weigard, Jarle, The break off of Citizenship New Roles Challenging the Political Order in The Demands of CitizenshipI, edited by Catriona McKinnon & Iain Hampsher-Monk (2000 Continuum, London) Falk, Richard, The Making of Global Citizenship in The Condition o f Citizenship, edited by Bart van Steenbergen (1994 Sage Publications, London) Franck, Thomas M. , The Empowered Self righteousness and Society in the Age of Individualism (1999 Oxford University Press, Oxford)) Habermas, Jurgen, Citizenship and National identicalness in The Condition of Citizenship, edited by Bart van Steenbergen (1994 Sage Publications, London) Heater, Derek, What is Citizenship? (1999 Polity Press, Cambridge, England) Henderson, Hazel, Transnational Corporations and Global Citizenship, American Behavioral Scientist, 43(8), May 2000, 1231-1261. Iyer, Pico, The Global Soul (2000 Alfred A. Knopf, New York).Jacobson, David, Rights across Borders Immigration and the Decline of Citizenship (1996 Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore) Lie, Rico & Servaes, Jan, Globalization consumption and identity towards researching nodal points, in The New Communications Landscape, edited by Georgette Wang, Jan Servaes and Anura Goonasekera (2000 Routledge, London) Kaspersen, Lars Bo, State and Citizenship Under Transformation in Western Europe in Public Rights, Public Rules Constituting Citizens in the World Polity and National Policy, edited by Connie L. McNeely (1998 Garland, New York) Keck, Margaret E. & Sikkink, Kathryn, Activists beyond Borders (1998 Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York) Kennedy, John F. Profiles in Courage (1956 Harper & Brothers, New York) Leary, Virginia, Citizenship, Human Rights, and Diversity, in Citizenship, Diversity, and Pluralism, edited by Alan C. Cairns, John C. Courtney, Peter MacKinnon, Hans J. Michelmann, & David E. Smith (1999 McGill-Queens University Press, Montreal) McNeely, Connie L. , Constituting Citizens Rights and Rules in Public Rights, Public Rules Constituting Citizens in the World Polity and National Policy, edited by Connie L. McNeely (1998 Garland, New York) Mosco, Vincent, Citizenship and Technopoles, from Communication, Citizenship, and Social Policy (1999 Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Lanham , England) Preston, P. W. Political/Cultural Identity Citizens and Nations in a Global Era (1997 Sage, London) Scammell, Margarett, Internet and civic engagement Age of the citizen-consumer found at http//jsis. artsci. washington. edu/programs/cwesuw/scammell. htm Steenbergen, Bart van, The Condition of Citizenship in The Condition of Citizenship, edited by Bart van Steenbergen (1994 Sage Publications, London) Turner, Bryan D. , Postmodern Culture/Modern Citizens in The Condition of Citizenship, edited by Bart van Steenbergen (1994 Sage Publications, London) Weale, Albert, Citizenship Beyond Borders in The Frontiers of Citizenship, edited by Ursula Vogel & Michael Moran (1991 St. Martins Press, New York)