The Elusive Fabric of Belonging: Unpacking the Definition of a Citizen

To define a citizen is to grapple with the very essence of human belonging, political identity, and the intricate dance between individual liberty and collective responsibility. Far from a static concept, the definition of a citizen has evolved dramatically across history, shaped by the prevailing political structures, philosophical ideals, and the ever-shifting relationship between the individual and the State. From the active participant in the ancient Greek polis to the rights-bearing subject of the modern nation-state, understanding what it means to be a citizen requires a journey through the foundational texts of Western thought, where the role of Law consistently emerges as a defining, yet often contested, element. This exploration is not merely an academic exercise; it is an inquiry into who we are, what we owe, and what we are owed within the communities we inhabit.

Ancient Roots: Citizenship in the Polis

Our journey begins in the cradle of Western political thought: ancient Greece, where the definition of a citizen was inextricably linked to active participation in the life of the State, or polis.

Aristotle and the Active Participant

For Aristotle, as articulated in his Politics, a citizen was not merely someone who resided in a city, nor even someone who could claim legal protection. Instead, he proposed a far more demanding definition:

"He who has the power to take part in the deliberative or judicial administration of any state is said by us to be a citizen of that state."

This meant a citizen was someone capable of holding office, serving on juries, and actively contributing to the governance of the polis. It was a definition rooted in duty and function, not just birthright. Excluded were women, slaves, and foreigners, highlighting the exclusive nature of this early concept of citizenship. The Law of the polis was not something simply to be obeyed, but actively shaped by its citizens.

Plato's Ideal State and the Role of Law

While Plato, in his Republic and Laws, focused more on the ideal structure of the State and the just organization of society, his work implicitly grappled with the roles individuals played. In his ideal State, the Law prescribed specific functions and duties for different classes, ensuring societal harmony. While not using the modern definition of a citizen as one with rights against the State, Plato's emphasis on the Law as the guiding principle for social order laid groundwork for later discussions on the legal framework of citizenship.

Contrasting Ancient Ideals: Greek vs. Roman Citizenship

The ancient world offered different models for the definition of a citizen:

Feature Ancient Greek (e.g., Athens) Ancient Roman (e.g., Republic/Empire)
Primary Basis Active participation in governance Legal status, rights, and privileges
Scope Exclusive; tied to direct democracy More inclusive; could be granted to non-Romans
Key Emphasis Duties, deliberation, public service Rights (e.g., appeal, property), legal protection
Relationship to Law Citizen helps create and enforce Law Citizen is subject to and protected by Law

The Medieval Interlude: Subjects, Sovereigns, and Shifting Loyalties

Following the decline of the Roman Empire, the concept of a citizen largely receded, replaced by the notion of a subject. In the feudal systems of medieval Europe, allegiance was primarily personal, owed to a lord, a baron, or a king, rather than to an abstract State. The Law was often customary, divine, or derived from the sovereign's will. The definition of belonging shifted from active participation in a polis to loyalty within a hierarchical structure, with few universal rights or duties beyond those dictated by one's position in society.

The Enlightenment's Dawn: Rights, Reason, and the Social Contract

The Enlightenment period marked a profound re-evaluation of the individual's relationship with the State, fundamentally altering the definition of a citizen. Philosophers began to articulate theories of natural rights and social contracts, laying the groundwork for modern liberal democracies.

Hobbes and the Sovereign's Law

Thomas Hobbes, in Leviathan, posited that individuals, in a state of nature, surrender certain freedoms to a sovereign State in exchange for order and protection. The citizen here is primarily a subject who owes obedience to the Law of the sovereign, whose power must be absolute to prevent a return to chaos. The definition of a citizen is one who lives under the protective, yet all-encompassing, Law of the State.

Locke and Natural Rights

John Locke, in his Two Treatises of Government, offered a more optimistic view. He argued that individuals possess inherent natural rights (life, liberty, property) that pre-exist the State. The purpose of government, formed through the consent of the governed, is to protect these rights. For Locke, the definition of a citizen includes not only the duty to obey Law but also the right to resist tyranny if the State fails to uphold its end of the social contract. The Law is meant to be a safeguard for individual freedoms.

Rousseau and the General Will

Jean-Jacques Rousseau, in The Social Contract, pushed the definition of a citizen further towards active participation, echoing ancient Greek ideals but within a modern framework. He argued that true freedom comes from obeying a Law that one has prescribed for oneself. The citizen is both a subject of the Law and a co-creator of the general will, which forms the legitimate basis of the State. This definition emphasizes collective self-governance and direct democracy, where sovereignty resides with the people.

(Image: A detailed depiction of a philosophical debate scene from the Enlightenment era, perhaps featuring figures like Locke, Rousseau, and Montesquieu discussing societal contracts and the role of the individual in the State, set in a grand library or salon. Books with titles like "Leviathan" and "The Social Contract" are visible on shelves or tables, and the figures are engaged in animated discussion, gesturing towards texts or maps, with a quill and inkpot prominently displayed.)

Modernity's Complexities: Nation-States, Globalism, and Evolving Definitions

The rise of the nation-state solidified a legalistic definition of a citizen, often tied to birth or naturalization within specific territorial boundaries. However, contemporary challenges are once again expanding our understanding.

The Legalistic Definition of a Citizen

In most modern States, the definition of a citizen is primarily legal, determined by national Law. This typically involves:

  • Jus Soli (Law of the soil): Citizenship based on place of birth.
  • Jus Sanguinis (Law of blood): Citizenship based on the nationality of one's parents.
  • Naturalization: A legal process by which a non-citizen acquires citizenship.

This legal status confers specific rights (e.g., voting, holding office, protection abroad) and duties (e.g., paying taxes, obeying Law, military service in some States).

Beyond Borders: Moral and Global Citizenship?

In an increasingly interconnected world, the traditional definition of a citizen as solely a member of a nation-state is being challenged. Concepts like "global citizenship" or "moral citizenship" suggest that individuals have responsibilities and rights that transcend national borders, particularly concerning human rights, environmental protection, and global justice. While not yet a legally codified status, this philosophical expansion reflects a growing awareness of shared humanity and interconnected fates.

Key Attributes of Modern Citizenship

Modern citizenship, regardless of its specific legal definition, often encompasses a blend of:

  • Legal Status: Rights and duties defined by the State's Law.
  • Political Participation: The right to vote, run for office, and engage in public discourse.
  • Social and Economic Rights: Access to education, healthcare, and welfare in many States.
  • Cultural Identity: A sense of belonging to a national community, though increasingly diverse.
  • Responsibility: To uphold the Law, contribute to the common good, and respect the rights of others.

The Ongoing Philosophical Inquiry: What Does it Mean to Belong?

The definition of a citizen remains a dynamic and profoundly important philosophical question. It forces us to confront the tension between the individual's autonomy and the collective's demands, the scope of the State's authority, and the fundamental role of Law in shaping our lives. From Aristotle's active participant to Locke's rights-bearer and Rousseau's co-legislator, the great thinkers of the Western tradition offer invaluable perspectives on this enduring inquiry. As societies evolve, so too will our understanding of what it truly means to be a citizen – to belong, to contribute, and to thrive within the intricate fabric of human community.

Video by: The School of Life

💡 Want different videos? Search YouTube for: ""Aristotle Politics Citizenship Explained""

Video by: The School of Life

💡 Want different videos? Search YouTube for: ""Social Contract Theory Explained Locke Rousseau Hobbes""

Share this post