Citizenship

With summer's arrival, I am going to try and start blogging again about my various inquiries into the world around us. Last weekend I tried to cross the boarder into Canada for my summer job at SNO Lab but was denied entry because I did not have the proper papers. Thus I am waiting for a few weeks for a labor market assessment to make sure that I am not stealing a job from a Canadian.

Personally, I am not a fan of closed borders. I find it hard to understand what difference being born inside or outside a country makes on that person's right to work or live inside of a country. A few weeks ago I was talking with a friend of mine about citizenship and rights and we developed some interesting insights into these issues. As we all know a republican government is centered around the social contract, the give and take between the citizens and their government. Rights are those things which the people believe their government must respect to ensure progress and stability. Also as part of our government system, people should be free to agree to whatever social contract they wish to. If a person thinks gambling and prostitution should be legal they are allowed to move to Las Vegas. This freedom to choose one's social contract is pretty reasonable within one's country, but much more restrained between nations. It should be very easy to move from one nation to another and immigration regulations should be greatly reduced.

Yet the traditional understanding of citizenship is not centered around the social contract. Usually, a person becomes a citizen by being born within a nation's borders not by intellectually agreeing with that country's outlook on rights and freedoms. Furthermore, why should a country's view on human rights and privileges apply only to people whom it considers citizens? Should not all human beings have the same rights as the people who were fortunate enough to be born within its borders? Being a citizen I believe means that they are the voters, those who design and mold their country's social contract. If you have come into a country, citizen or not, as a human being you are owed the rights which their belief in the social contract ascribes to you. If a person comes into the realm of influence of the United States they should have access to education, freedom of expression, freedom of religion, and due process. This has recently come into question with military detainees. I believe that if the government deems it ok to torture detainees they must also believe that it is ok to torture any other person including their citizens. There are many questions which would arise concerning the line between rights and other government programs. Social security does not seem to be a right and a person who comes into the United States should not automatically be entitled to receiving it because they have not paid taxes into the system. Yet what about health care or education? These are expensive but also very important to any person living in the United States and essential to ensuring progress. Ultimately these types of questions would have to be answered by those who are designing the social contract.

So how does a person become a citizen, an active sculptor of the social contract? In Rome and Greece, public service was an integral part of the life of its citizens whether in the army or in the forum and courts. I believe that in order to become a citizen people must demonstrate their desire to serve the country thought a term of selfless public service. This makes sure that those who influence the government's action are truly devoted to it and also brings back meaning to the role of the citizen.