A Discourse Theory of Citizenship

A Discourse Theory of Citizenship This article discusses the thought of citizenship and how citizenship as a hold of ordinary engagement is crucial to democracy as a whole. The reservoir, Robert Asen, presents a new forecast that citizenship is a dynamic mode of universe engagement. The first slit of the article discusses questions about both sidereal day beliefs and perspectives. The second section of the article discusses how citizenship is a mode of populace engagement. The third section discusses how public engagement moldiness be examined and what seat be learned from that analysis.The last(a) section discusses how the concept of citizenship can be extended through the authors Discourse Theory. The first part of the article begins by explaining how inside the public and even within root words all sets of views or values argon not universal. This room that it is a challenge to represent the views of groups. This also means that members of groups need to stand up for their views. For good example, if you are part of a human being rights organization, but do not approve of their stated views on a particular country, you should make your voice heard.This presents a challenge to group go onership because they have to make the groups stated views more customary in regularize to not alienate any of the participants. In addition, tidy sum do not have a general view on how decisions should be made. For example, the article menti hotshotd how the activist AIDS organization, ACT UP, had a bully deal of trouble coming up with a consensus about whether or not they should testify in front of Congress. These facts mean that the views and perspectives of a group of people, their subjectivity, is more of an ever-changing process than a dormant group of opinions and should be treated as such.This idea is significant to chat as a whole because it helps understand why it is consequential to constantly make veritable that no ones views in a group a re being marginalized. The next section discussed how citizenship is a mode of public engagement. It explains that citizenship is not a group of well-defined privileges that come with legally accompaniment in a country, but instead it is much more. It is a way of acquire involved with the human around you. Citizenship is a process of dealing with the world that influences the views and beliefs of the public. It does not have to come from only voting it exists in seven-fold modes.Some of these modes include consumer choices, work habits, and volunteer work. These sorts of actions could be more alpha than voting alone. This is because voting does not show your views in great in the flesh(predicate) detail and therefore does not alship canal help advance your person-to-person beliefs into public discussion. Voting only ascribes your views to one of two general view sets, which most people do not generally agree with completely. The different forms of citizenship, such as volunt eering at a soup kitchen, can more accurately represent your views and ideas of how the world ought to be run.This is because the public sees how you are playacting to directly make a change in society and may decide to join you in your cause. As the article says, Democracys heart does not beat in the halls of Congress or in the voting booth, but in general enactments of citizenship (Asen, 197). The important communication concept that can be taken from this section, is that the power of democracy rests on conventionality people and not on elected officials or bureaucrats. This makes it extremely important that ones views are expressed both in public discussion and in the way one lives their life.The responsibilities of living in a democracy do not only come once every two years for elections, but are present every day during human interactions. The next section discusses how public engagement in the form of citizenship must be examined. Public engagement is not a static set o f concepts, but instead a fluid, dynamic process of interaction that occurs at a personal level. Consequently, it is different from person to person and must be treated specially. The dynamic nature of citizenship makes it impossible to make unique(predicate) theories of how the public engages in citizenship.This means that there cannot be true experts in the analysis of human-to-human interaction. It does not, however, prevent qualitative analysis of public engagement in citizenship. This section also discussed how it is inherently run a risky to engage in citizenship. The risk occurs when an individuals views are known and the public becomes aware of ones beliefs. For example, participating in a Pro-Choice organization could lead some of your Pro-Life neighbors to dislike you for your views. On the other hand, there is a social benefit to this risk because it can expose you to people who appropriate similar views to you.This common bond of risk unites organizations and makes th em stronger over time. The important communication topic in this section is that communication your views involves risk, but that risk is worthy because it can lead to stronger social ties. The last section focused on how the rendering of citizenship is grow when the authors Discourse Theory of Citizenship is applied. The commentary of citizenship is traditionally limited to the rights and privileges that are granted to individuals who are legally living in a country.With the application of this new theory, the definition can be expanded in a few ways. First the, relationship betwixt the citizen and citizenship has been reformulated. No longer is citizenship just the product of being a citizen, but instead it is a way of acting. Second, citizenship is not something that all citizens have equally. age every citizen can vote, the affect he/she has on public discourse also depends on power and money. For example, a rich individual can attend special interest meetings that requir e large donations in order to participate.This makes these people more capable of influencing what laws are ultimately passed. Another example is how in the past and still to a certain extent now, incline can either help or hinder ones level of citizenship. The third expansion of our understanding of citizenship is through the analysis of hybridization cases of citizenship. Hybrid cases of citizenship are instances when normal everyday acts are also forms of citizenship. wiz example of this is if an individual spends more money at an organic food for thought store because they want to support the organic food industry.The expansion of the definition of citizenship through the Discourse Theory of Citizenship allows for a better understanding of citizenship and how public communication in many different forms is responsible for maintaining an effective democracy. When communicating through citizenship, it is important to understand that the citizenship includes more than just voti ng. It also includes everyday person-to-person interactions, buying choices, and group memberships. By understanding citizenship through this expanded definition, it is possible to better focus public discourse in ways that can advance ones personal beliefs and goals.