‘The Cosmopolites: The Coming of the Global Citizen,’ by Atossa Araxia Abrahamian – The New York Times

Richard Bellamy’s review of The Cosmopolites and his valid  commentary regarding the nature of citizenship:

The Canadian philosopher Joseph Carens has characterized national citizenship as “the modern equivalent of feudal class privilege.’’ That seems all too accurate a description of the citizenship of the absolute monarchies of the U.A.E., where only 15 percent of the population enjoy the privileges of citizens. These benefits are paid for largely by the unearned windfall of oil and gas revenues and they involve almost no civic duties or political rights. The multiple citizenships of the U.H.N.W.I. are similarly free of responsibility and lacking in political commitment — that is their point. They are commercial transactions conducted for profit. Neither of these types of citizenship corresponds to the hard-won forms of citizenship found within democratic states.

Herein lies the weakness of Abrahamian’s analysis. The political and social rights of genuine, state-based citizenship derive from the contribution members make to sustaining the public life of the community, be it through participation in the economy as workers and consumers, caring for children and the elderly or simply recognizing and abiding by its laws. All who contribute in these ways should be entitled to citizenship. By contrast, global citizens belong nowhere and anywhere. Yet both the injustice of denying citizenship to the bidoon and those like them and the unfairness of granting it as a commercial transaction to the super-rich stem from the same cause — a failure to link the rights of citizens to those civic duties that arise from active membership in a political community.