I'm trying to wrap my brain around the concept of citizenship. Going back to Diderot and Hobbes (tbh, Socrates and Aristotle) and attempting to figure out things like a) what it means, b) why we care and c) how it's supposed to work. I guess I'm of the opinion that we've become too liberal with "citizenship", and have broadened the term to the point where it doesn't carry with it many of the duties and responsibilities that come with the rights associated with it. Maybe it requires a breakdown of "citizen" into categories like: (1) those protected by the state (law enforcement, fire, military, etc), but don't serve anywhere or pay federal income taxes (2) those who pay taxes (3) those who serve or have served contractually (somewhere like the military or the post office or a Dept of State Civil Response Corps or USAID or something) for a period of time (2-5 years, say) and pay taxes--therefore fulfulling some of the "duty" requirement, and therefore are given the "rights" that come with full citizenship. This is not to say that other changes in the gov't won't occur (drawdown of military & federal workers, various tax implementations, etc), but more a philosophy of what it means to serve in order to earn your civic rights (not your Creator-endowed ones). Do we want to live in a society where you get more civic rights and protections for being born in Portland and not paying a dollar of federal taxes or contributing to society in a positive way than a guy immigrating legally from Country X, even joining the military or Foreign Service organization, and paying taxes for his services received? IMO, we're seeing a degradation of civic thought and discourse for a few reasons. One, people don't care enough. Two, they're not educated enough, and will believe anything. Three, people think (for the most part) that there's some "rights" that they're entitled to that are disproportionate to what they've paid or served for. I'm looking for input here b/c this place has a pretty diverse background and people who've read things I've never heard of, or have ideas I haven't considered. I'm also biased just based on my life and decisions. Thoughts?
Heavy topic. But a good one. This generation is an apathetic one. It's a natural consequence of a society becoming more and more decomposed with sinking morals, and was bound to happen. It will get worse. As a result, citizenship has less and less value. It also stands to reason that as governments at all levels are more and more run by special interests via lobbyists, we fight to hold on to our entitlements rather than seeking to do what is right. Look at what Medicare and Social Security have become- sacred cows that require homage. Try taking away entitlements- even those that are ill gotten, and the fight is on. Citizenship is being reduced from "Ask not what your government can do for you...", to "where the hell is my entitlement money I cheated to get?". I think also that people, with good reason, are also questioning what good is their citizenship when they have less and less voice in government. They feel more powerless when decisions are made without their approval (and often without their knowledge) from special interest government. And this has created a divisive government and divisive partisan citizenry.
I thought a big part of our constitution/bill of rights was that these things were given to us upon birth. I agree there are a lot of ungrateful people. But the rights are just like automatic because they are suppose to be, no?
This is the kind of crap that every generation says about the next, and I don't buy it. "What is happening to our young people? They disrespect their elders, they disobey their parents. They ignore the law. They riot in the streets inflamed with wild notions. Their morals are decaying. What is to become of them?" - Plato, 4th century Here's my take: beyond the legal privileges we are afforded by being "Americans," the notion of being a citizen of the US doesn't hold a place in our hearts as it has in previous generations. Nationalism is dying, because it no longer applies to many young people on a personal level. Speaking from experience, here is why I think this is: The internet. I grew up interacting with people from many different cultures, learning about different customs, seeing different arts and learning different languages thanks to the internet. That's one side. The other side is America's relentless cultural imperialism. The reason why I could interact with folks around the world when I was a kid is because they already knew some English, they already saw the movies I've seen, they know what my life is like. They are, to some degree, culturally "Americans." Who am I or my government to say that they aren't? Growing up with these interactions shapes you to some degree. The nationalist designations that you are supposed to hold for yourself and others seem so petty, especially when rigidly enforced by the older generation who, in our eyes, seem xenophobic and at times bigoted. The same generation that tries to tell us that America is still about freedom and liberty when it has been obvious for many years before we were even born that it is only about the bottom line, 100% of the time. My passport says I'm an American.
I thought this was quite interesting: Ex-Australian Prime Minister John Howard: It isn't completely related to your topic but it touches on it a bit.
The idea of serving to gain citizenship or extra rights seems in direct opposition to the great experiment that was the united states. The military is organized and run by civilians. The president is a civilian. So is the secy. of defense. It was a really big deal that W appointed (Air Force) Gen. Michael Hayden as head of CIA for a reason. Nobody questioned his abilities, just that he was military and appointed to what should be a civilian position.
It's not to gain "extra" rights. It's to assume the responsibilities that come with the rights you want. I agree. I don't know where you're going with this. It was a really big deal that W appointed (Air Force) Gen. Michael Hayden as head of CIA for a reason. Nobody questioned his abilities, just that he was military and appointed to what should be a civilian position.[/QUOTE] That's why I put in there Dept of State and post office and USAID. There are things that the government does, that it needs people for, and that aren't glamorous or sexy and are hard work. It doesn't have to be military. But most people are more familiar with the military and its benefits and duties than USAID.
I see your point, but that wasn't what I meant. I'm not talking about young adults and their parental relationships. I'm talking about societal permissiveness and things that were morally wrong yesterday being morally right today. Things morally wrong today will be morally right tomorrow. With this comes a type of personal anesthesia that dulls us to morality and many other things. It also effects our views and feelings of citizenship.
I think this is exactly right. To generalize it a bit, humans as a species are tribal but as human society has evolved, humans have expanded their tribes. It used to be literal tribes (in fact, you could even say the first step was just family, possibly prior to actually becoming fully human in terms of evolution), then it became groups of tribes, then people organized and cared about nation-states. In America, at least from the general sense I get, people used to really only be active and care about the very local...their town. But as more and more communication avenues have opened up, people have become active and interested in their state and entire nation. Witness the intense debates over whether gay marriage would be legalized in California, even by people in the Heartland or on the East Coast...people either (or both) culturally or geographically removed from California. It's not at all surprising that this would expand to a global reach with the advent of the Internet being easily obtained by so many people, a generation growing up with the Internet. Just as people aren't intensely tribal about their town/city anymore, or their state even, it stands to reason that nationalism would start to die. We're American for legal reasons, just as we're Californians or Oregonians or whatever else for legal purposes. Boundaries are important to people in terms of rules and jurisdictions. But culturally, we (not each of you individually, but the country as each new generation comes in, IMO) are becoming less "American" and more just a part of a global society. So, I'm perfectly happy to let anyone who comes here and pays taxes and follows the laws to be a citizen. To me, that is all being a citizen of America is: you live here, you pay in and you follow the rules on the books.
That's just the natural course of a changing culture. There's no stopping it, so embrace it. Everybody learn Esperanto!
Solid post. But I don't think our growing sense of being "citizens of the world" and not just Americans come from just the internet. What's an American car these days? There are Hondas that have more domestically manufactured parts than some Ford cars. What's the incremental cost in going on vacation in Florida or Hawaii vs Cancun or Barcelona? Drastically less than a few decades ago. What are the odds that when you do travel you'll find somebody who speaks English now, no matter what corner of the world you are in? Again, drastically higher than not terribly long ago. Past Enemies of the State--Russians, Vietnamese, Germans, Japanese--are now living in our homes on Study Abroad programs, and I find myself having more in common with my English mother-in-law than my own redneck brother. Nationalism is the culmination of Us vs Them thinking. "Them" are inexorably becoming "Us."
So that's it! I thought maybe I'd gotten drunk at the bar and invited everyone home with me. Now, how do I get rid of them? barfo
