STAGE 2: New Vision of Citizenship
After studying current conceptions of citizenship and now moving on to studying different theories of citizenship, my thinking has expanded around the topic. My current conceptions of citizenship included understanding one’s own duties in their home environment and society before trying to understand other environments. In addition, I also was unaware that different factors influence the way in which citizens are engaged. Some of these factors include location, and population size to name a few.
In moving to thinking about citizenship on a theoretical level, I have focused more deeply on the issue, therefore posing new questions about how to construct an ideal model of citizenship. When visiting Tuscany for the class trip, this led me to the question of why some models work for one society but not the others? In further reflection I started thinking about previous models of citizenship laid out by previous theorist and philosophers. I immediately saw some similarities in the models. Those similarities being that the ideal qualities of a citizen didn’t change, however the agent used to govern this engagement did. In other words, in all models of citizenship there are basic expectations for citizens, on the other hand, different factors like religion, and government influence what this looks like. In addition, other factors like time period also influences the model. This is important because when thinking about a theoretical model and posing what’s necessary to have, it is beneficial to know that expectations of the citizens don’t change, the institutions that enforce them do.
Ideal qualities of citizens is something that has not varied since early times of citizenship. There were the same expectations for citizens. Those include: Obeying all rules, contributing to society in a positive way, and shows respect towards other neighbors. Whether being ruled by a religious or government figure, you are supposed to strive and meet these basic goals. Nevertheless, depending on what type of authority leader you have, that influences how you enact these duties. For example, when religion is the agent of authority, you obey all rules, which essentially extend from the bible. Furthermore, you show respect to your neighbors by honoring the bible doctrine of “do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”
In addition to government and religion influencing the way citizens accomplished their duties as ideal citizens, the time period also influences this. The time period influences the way in which social order was established. Hence, social class division and gender roles is influenced by the period in which these models were established. Therefore, during earlier time periods when economic divides was the social norm it directly affected the context of the expectations for citizens. For examples, in relation to the expectation of treating your neighbor with respect, if you were of the lower or peasant class, that expectation would only be valid within that one social group. Moreover, during earlier times, women were excluded from models of citizenship altogether.
It’s important to know that the expectations for citizens do not change. When coming up with theoretical models, it can be believed that you modify them because you want citizens to be responsible for different things. However, this is inaccurate. For example, whether in North Carolina, Venice or Tuscany, all citizens must contribute to the society in a positive manner. It’s important to note that models of citizenship look very different because they are different agents that effect these cities.
In conclusion, when thinking about theoretical models, it important to know what aspects are varied in relation to different models. Furthermore, to construct an effective model of citizenship, you must consider the government and time period. Also, the other minor factors like location and population size matter as well.
In moving to thinking about citizenship on a theoretical level, I have focused more deeply on the issue, therefore posing new questions about how to construct an ideal model of citizenship. When visiting Tuscany for the class trip, this led me to the question of why some models work for one society but not the others? In further reflection I started thinking about previous models of citizenship laid out by previous theorist and philosophers. I immediately saw some similarities in the models. Those similarities being that the ideal qualities of a citizen didn’t change, however the agent used to govern this engagement did. In other words, in all models of citizenship there are basic expectations for citizens, on the other hand, different factors like religion, and government influence what this looks like. In addition, other factors like time period also influences the model. This is important because when thinking about a theoretical model and posing what’s necessary to have, it is beneficial to know that expectations of the citizens don’t change, the institutions that enforce them do.
Ideal qualities of citizens is something that has not varied since early times of citizenship. There were the same expectations for citizens. Those include: Obeying all rules, contributing to society in a positive way, and shows respect towards other neighbors. Whether being ruled by a religious or government figure, you are supposed to strive and meet these basic goals. Nevertheless, depending on what type of authority leader you have, that influences how you enact these duties. For example, when religion is the agent of authority, you obey all rules, which essentially extend from the bible. Furthermore, you show respect to your neighbors by honoring the bible doctrine of “do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”
In addition to government and religion influencing the way citizens accomplished their duties as ideal citizens, the time period also influences this. The time period influences the way in which social order was established. Hence, social class division and gender roles is influenced by the period in which these models were established. Therefore, during earlier time periods when economic divides was the social norm it directly affected the context of the expectations for citizens. For examples, in relation to the expectation of treating your neighbor with respect, if you were of the lower or peasant class, that expectation would only be valid within that one social group. Moreover, during earlier times, women were excluded from models of citizenship altogether.
It’s important to know that the expectations for citizens do not change. When coming up with theoretical models, it can be believed that you modify them because you want citizens to be responsible for different things. However, this is inaccurate. For example, whether in North Carolina, Venice or Tuscany, all citizens must contribute to the society in a positive manner. It’s important to note that models of citizenship look very different because they are different agents that effect these cities.
In conclusion, when thinking about theoretical models, it important to know what aspects are varied in relation to different models. Furthermore, to construct an effective model of citizenship, you must consider the government and time period. Also, the other minor factors like location and population size matter as well.
The Tuscan ExperienceThe Importance of “community” and its influence on the duty-bound versus the purposely engaged citizen I have been a temporary resident of Italy, but more specifically Venice for about two months now. Although I have made many adjustments and have grown from feeling like a tourist, there is something missing that makes me feel “apart.” When traveling to Tuscany and observing some of the residents in small towns versus in Florence and Venice, I noticed a stark difference in the deliberative practices of the residents. The sense of community that resides in the small villages of Tuscany directly influenced the behaviors and norms of the citizens there. Community and the atmosphere it fosters is a key component to an ideal model of citizenship, one that I had not considered before. According to McMillan & Chavis, this atmosphere of community can be defined as "a feeling that members have of belonging, a feeling that members matter to one another and to the group, and a shared faith that members' needs will be met through their commitment to be together.” Furthermore, the atmosphere of community produces citizens that are purposely engaged as opposed to duty-bound. You might be wondering what this feeling of belonging looks like, and why some towns are able to do this as opposed to others. When visiting Montichiello, the smallest village of the trip, there seemed to be a bond between the constituents like I had never seen before. The residents were sitting outside talking to each other. When we approached them, they immediately engaged with us in conversation as well. Not only did the residents feel like they belonged, they made sure to instill the feeling within us as well. When citizens feel like they belong in the community and that they matter to others they are more likely to be purposely engaged thus contributing positively to the society in which they are valued members. This two model form of citizenship is very common, however, the factors that contributes to one becoming an engaged citizen over a duty-bound is still up for debate. Those that are duty-bound citizens only contribute to their community to maintain social and political structure and order. On the other hand, those that are purposely engaged contribute to society because they directly benefit from it prospering. I believe that when you feel like you matter, you contribute to your community on purpose. In contrast, when a person feels like “the other” or “the excluded one” there are more likely to resort to being a duty-bound citizen in which they do the bare minimum, because it is their right as a constituent. In Siena, I noticed that the citizens were purposely engaged in tourism. While this seems like a far-fetched idea, because tourism is looked at through a negative lens in Venice, the residents in Siena took pride in others visiting and wanted to inform the tourist about Siena’s historical significance. They were positive and very interested in having us come back to study there. When pondering about why some communities are able to provide this sense of community and others are not, it led me to the concept of varied models of citizenship depending on different factors. I had this preconceived notion that those within a country had similar citizenship models, not considering that there could be differences in the varied regions. Some of the key factors that affect models of citizenship are location, population size, diversity, and the current political and economic state of the city or country. The small villages were able to create engaged citizens because of the small population size and its isolated location, which helped to contribute a strong atmosphere of community. Furthermore, when a community is small, oftentimes tradition plays a major role. Therefore, there is a history and legacy of engagement in the community. Overall, the trip to Tuscany was very beneficial as it served to show how social norms and behaviors of citizens differ across a country. Also, it displayed that what works for one place in relation to how to “make” good citizens, will not always be the solution for another. This trip was constructive in understanding what motivates citizens to adopt this notion of adhoc citizenship, and actively participate in their community. Work Cited Chavis, David M., and David W. Mcmillan. "Sense of Community through Brunswik's Lens: A First Look." Journal of Community Psychology 14.1 (1986): 24-40. Web. |
|