Here it is, a day before I see your next post, Josh. I finally comment after a week of mulling. I think the word citizen connotes a location, a place. Maybe I'm a bit old-fashioned in that regard, but it seems to me that the power of citizenship diminishes as the circumference of the circles around us grows. I am more easily heard, potentially more powerful, and therefore more responsible in the nearby "city" (Rougemont is very little hamlet of a place) than I am in the larger frames of state (i.e., province) or nation or, heaven forbid, planet.
And so, I do think that the concept of citizenship has meaning and even a moral substance that is tied with the plain and increasingly outmoded notion of locality. I think that locality has transformed through technologies like the telephone, the radio/television, and (most of all) the Internet and its applications. I live a world away from you, Josh, and yet I have easily exchanged ideas with you. I have waved at my neighbors in the heat of the US southern summer, but have I exchanged words?
Does this technological re-centering of our spheres make citizenship a cipher? I wonder if that's part of the problem with the concept; perhaps that warping of locality also warps our responsibilities or perceptions of power. And makes it more likely for evil to emerge in larger frames. Or, perhaps, makes it easier for us to see the evils that are done as if -- as if! -- on our behalf.
As a kid (and still) I always felt I was a world citizen, humanity being one nation.
I grew up in a province of the Netherlands that is most separate from the Netherlands as a nation. Also, I am half North-African. I was torn between three cultures—Dutch, Frisian, Moroccan—so I didn't fit anywhere regarding culture or ethnicity. But still, I did feel kinship with many people, regardless of their background. I was very naïve thinking everyone felt like that though. Luckily the internet and global friendships came along in my early teens!
I’ve never liked the term citizen for some reason. Maybe it’s that hint of conformity and blind obedience. I would rather subscribe to community as a term - despite being a rather solitary person. Community invites - citizenship compels, I believe. Always for me it is freedom that is important and to be compelled is a manipulation. When invited we have a choice.
Your last paragraph sums it up nicely. I am a citizen and I choose to live within that framework, but for me, being a citizen is not even to close to a primary identity. When being a citizen of one country or another becomes the way in which a person primarily defines themself, then the individual is all but lost. It's that tight rope between a unified humanity and individual fulfillment.
So beautiful. And this speaks to so many of our dreams: “ What if the rallying cry for unity emanated not from the brick and mortar institutions of power but from a mutual recognition of the humanity that resides in all.” It’s so odd, really, that rights aren’t considered universal within political boundaries but are instead tied to one’s documented legal status.
I don't disagree with your essay - I consider myself to be on Team Humankind - among other subsets - and the crimes committed in the name of a national identity are beyond calculation.
But... the subsets can still bring both value and connection.
Here it is, a day before I see your next post, Josh. I finally comment after a week of mulling. I think the word citizen connotes a location, a place. Maybe I'm a bit old-fashioned in that regard, but it seems to me that the power of citizenship diminishes as the circumference of the circles around us grows. I am more easily heard, potentially more powerful, and therefore more responsible in the nearby "city" (Rougemont is very little hamlet of a place) than I am in the larger frames of state (i.e., province) or nation or, heaven forbid, planet.
And so, I do think that the concept of citizenship has meaning and even a moral substance that is tied with the plain and increasingly outmoded notion of locality. I think that locality has transformed through technologies like the telephone, the radio/television, and (most of all) the Internet and its applications. I live a world away from you, Josh, and yet I have easily exchanged ideas with you. I have waved at my neighbors in the heat of the US southern summer, but have I exchanged words?
Does this technological re-centering of our spheres make citizenship a cipher? I wonder if that's part of the problem with the concept; perhaps that warping of locality also warps our responsibilities or perceptions of power. And makes it more likely for evil to emerge in larger frames. Or, perhaps, makes it easier for us to see the evils that are done as if -- as if! -- on our behalf.
Powerful, honest raw words - respect
As a kid (and still) I always felt I was a world citizen, humanity being one nation.
I grew up in a province of the Netherlands that is most separate from the Netherlands as a nation. Also, I am half North-African. I was torn between three cultures—Dutch, Frisian, Moroccan—so I didn't fit anywhere regarding culture or ethnicity. But still, I did feel kinship with many people, regardless of their background. I was very naïve thinking everyone felt like that though. Luckily the internet and global friendships came along in my early teens!
I’ve never liked the term citizen for some reason. Maybe it’s that hint of conformity and blind obedience. I would rather subscribe to community as a term - despite being a rather solitary person. Community invites - citizenship compels, I believe. Always for me it is freedom that is important and to be compelled is a manipulation. When invited we have a choice.
Your last paragraph sums it up nicely. I am a citizen and I choose to live within that framework, but for me, being a citizen is not even to close to a primary identity. When being a citizen of one country or another becomes the way in which a person primarily defines themself, then the individual is all but lost. It's that tight rope between a unified humanity and individual fulfillment.
So beautiful. And this speaks to so many of our dreams: “ What if the rallying cry for unity emanated not from the brick and mortar institutions of power but from a mutual recognition of the humanity that resides in all.” It’s so odd, really, that rights aren’t considered universal within political boundaries but are instead tied to one’s documented legal status.
I don't disagree with your essay - I consider myself to be on Team Humankind - among other subsets - and the crimes committed in the name of a national identity are beyond calculation.
But... the subsets can still bring both value and connection.