Good Citizenship and the Citizenry
Citizenship is a fairly tricky concept for a number of reasons. While it plays and important roll in the identity of an individual as well as a group of people, it is also a legally binding ideal of a person to country. It is in this sense that "Citizenship" is both governmentally institutional as well as culturally implemented; making the delineation of a clear definition that covers both aspects of this equation more difficult.
From the legal perspective citizenship -- especially in America -- tends entail a number of rights that comes with come with being a member of a governmentally sanctioned group of people. We Americans tend to feel that we have a sort of social contract with the government, which carries with it certain requirements. These can entail something as mandatory as taxes to something less solidified as the encouragement of participation and care for the political process. In the most honest sense, a citizen is a person who upholds the laws and freedoms declared within the constitution.
Citizens in America are supposed to vote in elections, observe the rights of jury duty and pay their taxes from a technical perspective. But there is also a cultural sentiment that says we should exercise our right to free speech in the name of public discourse, serve -- the best we can -- our society and care for our fellow citizens. It is this ideal that allows for a largely loose definition of what a citizen is, because from a cultural perspective, there are no rules, regulations or guidelines limiting or perpetuating the ideals of an individual thoughts on citizenship within the country. People therefore, ultimately, end up resting to their own experiences and thoughts to help define their concept and loyalty to the ideal.
But as David M. Ricci states in his discourse on the topic, Good Citizenship in America, "good citizenship is less tangible, more difficult to study and sometimes overlooked in the nation roster of political institutions. Americans admire good citizenship. But they are not always sure what citizens should do on behalf of the communities in which they live." It is this kind of thought which allows the ideal of citizenship to fall through the cracks because it is inevitably taken for granted by the born and bread of the country. The core of our ideal rests upon and between three main players: the individual American citizen, society as a whole and the government which presides over them.
The ideal of what is good citizenship is ultimately solidified in the thoughts and consensus of society. It is basically up to the will of the people to decide what is appropriate and what they feel is required as citizens beyond the scripted laws. This of course leaves the individuals with the ability to further interpret and internalize these ideals amongst their own value systems, almost creating a trickle down effect. But the crux of citizenship is held within the bonds -- as many things are -- between the individual, society and the government.
Without the success of one part, it's nearly impossible for the other 2/3 to fully succeed in the ideal of the pursuit of prosperity and happiness. It is also therefore a necessity for the three systems to work together in an effort to succeed and allow for a dynamic future of progress. It is therefore important for the average citizen to recognize the importance of citizenship as well as the roll they have, rather should, play within both society and government processes. Good citizenship creates a society where people care about both the individual as well as the whole because they innately affect one another.
"...We may deduce that nonvoters are, in a sense, bad citizens. They do not intend their abstention to harm public life and institutions. But neither do they regard themselves as obliged to fill what may be called the office of citizenship, which is nowhere formally define but constitutes a vital calling in any democratic society," states Ricci. This is why the promotion of voting, communicating with government representatives and providing active interest to both local and national problems are hallmarks of a quality citizen. Because they go outside of themselves to care for and understand what will ultimately likely affect them and their society. There is a level of caring involved in the process.
Citizenship has been a benefit for both the people and the government; it allows us to stand as a collective in times of need against greater forces. But along with these benefits come mandatory responsibilities like taxes. It's like a mutually exclusive club that allows for certain freedoms and personal protections, but in turn you have to give back as a form of reciprocation.
As Ricci says, "the practice of good citizenship has helped the nation to establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare and secure liberty." These are ideals are amongst the most famed in our countries history; it is after all, from the citizen -- or so the saying goes -- from which the power of government in a democracy derives.
Yet, without public or civic involvement, not only does the society do worse so does the government. Harry Boyte argues that the "decline of civic involvement in politics in recent years means that people lose a sense of their stake and ownership in the nation." Without this sense of self and importance intertwined with the ideal of government, our country becomes, from a general standpoint, holistically unsuccessful.
The flow of power, influence and opinion is a fairly circular model between the people and our government. Within the U.S., the idea that power comes from the people lies at the foundation of our society. It is this idea that sparks the continual necessity of contact between the general population and the set organization that governs them. The general goal of our society is to live freely and be allowed to prosper without having any of our rights infringed upon. The governments job in this situation is to help us achieve our goals, and generally to act in our best interests.
This however, is where the balance between public opinion and media help dictate governmental focus and policy. The government enacts bills, policies, laws, regulations, programs, etc., to help the people. The process is self feeding, the goal of government is ultimately meant to serve the individual within the U.S., but the individual wouldn't prosper without the government.
The point here is that the power to influence within our society doesn't simply flow in one direction, nor have one source. It is a symbiotic relationship that has made America such a unique and historically effective country. We have a system that allows the thoughts of the individual to be well distributed to not only the people in "power," but to all the people in the country.
Government is generally looked upon as the powerful source within our nation. It is too often that people forget that Government does, and is supposed to, be working for us, the American people, and it is citizenship itself that defines this relationship with them. It is in this respect that we should take more care in maintaining that relationship from a cultural standpoint as well as a technical one, for "liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it; no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it. While it lies there it needs no constitution, no law, no court to save it.," said Judge Learned Hand in The Spirit of Liberty.