On Citizenship

What does it mean to be a "good citizen"? It is debatable that there was ever an answer to that question. Philosophers, political theorists and essayists have made names for themselves attempting to provide a definition of "citizenship", with varying degrees of success. These definitions, more often than not, explore the relationship between the citizen and the state. Sometimes, they are couched in the language of "rights" and "responsibilities". John Rawls has made a life's work extolling the virtues of the "deliberative democracy" where the citizen must actively participate in the affairs of state for democracy to be at its most efficient. To oversimplify, the citizen owes the state some form of payment in return for the state's protection. When we look at the Rawlsian citizen, service to the state is a defining characteristic.

This perspective is reflective of the overarching American narrative of citizenship. Beginning with William James' "Moral equivalent of War", American social discourse has emphasized a notion of sacrifice for the greater good. To be "good citizens", we must unite for a common cause, against a common enemy. The idea of self-denial as a path to a better country is bound up in American mythology, and consequently we turn to this idea when we want people to become more involved. Our politicians and community leaders call on a perceived sense of duty to inspire people to be "better citizens" and become involved in service activities.

Increasingly, however, it seems that we may be missing the point. The beauty of the overarching narrative is its simplicity and applicability. If all people in a society define themselves (at least in part) according to the same basic themes, then there is the potential to impact their behavior by appealing to those themes. But what if things don't work that way? What if individuals do not form their identities based on a set of limited, constant ideas. Post-modernists argue that the meta-narrative does not exist, and all that matters are personal narratives (another simplification). So now the question is, how do we appeal to millions of distinct personal narratives to influence individuals to be "good citizens"? Can we? Should we? Is there anything useful about "responsibilities" talk, and are we expecting too much from individuals?