Citizenship and Beyond; The Social Dynamics of an Idea

7/28/2019 Citizenship and Beyond; The Social Dynamics of an Idea

1/30

Citizenship and Beyond: The Social Dynamics of an IdeaAuthor(s): RALF DAHRENDORFSource: Social Research, Vol. 41, No. 4 (WINTER 1974), pp. 673-701Published by: The New SchoolStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40970203 .

Accessed: 13/06/2013 07:02

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

The New School is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Social Research.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.40.212.123 on Thu, 13 Jun 2013 07:02:10 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=newschoolhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/40970203?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/40970203?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=newschool


2/30

Citizenship ndBeyond:TheSocial Dynamicsof an Idea /BY RALF DAHRENDORFA here snomore ynamicocialfigurenmodern istoryhanThe Citizen. Forcenturiesow,he hasbeenmembernd motorofrising ocialgroups: f theurbanpropertiedlass n feudalsociety,f henew ndustriallass nthe ighteenthndninetenthcenturies,fwhatmightwellcometo be calledtheeducationalclassor perhaps, ith new nd activemeaning,he eisure lass)today,nd throughoutf thosewholiberated hemselvesromdependencend deprivationvilleins nd subjects,olonialde-pendents, inoritiesfmanykinds,women. In inspiringndofteneading hese roups, he Citizenhas moved ast nd far,sofar ndeed hatwemaybe approachingpoint t whichhe isin danger foverreachingimselfydestroyinghrough isac-tivityhevery onditions hichhe needstobreathendwork.The dynamicsfcitizenship ight pset n the end that qui-librium fequalitynd ibertyor he reationfwhichtseemeduniquely uited.This, n a manner fspeaking,s what wantto say n thispaper. It is, fnot pessimistic,problematic essage,ut thenI have lways elt hat uthlessnalysiswhich ends obegloomyratherhan osy is a stimuluso action, nd in anycasea pre-conditionf consideredction. To be a littlemoreexplicit:Hope (without hich o actionspossible)sgenerallyhe ntag-onist fthefacts,ut the ntagonistshriveneachother. I ammore oncernedhat hemannernwhich define heproblem

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/30

674 SOCIAL RESEARCHbetrays number of professional eformations hich I shouldmakeexplicit t the outset est therebe a misunderstandingfmypurpose nd approach.Citizenships,to beginwith, n idea which findstsexpressionin law,in that ensea legal idea. It describes herights, suallytheprivileges,f a category f men living n cities adults,tax-payers, wners f property as against ountryfolk,heproperty-less, minors,womenand the like. Citizenship reates Rechts-gemeinschaft,communitynder aw; itmakesthosewhobelonga partof thesystemf ruleswhichprotectshemfrom ach otherand,by creating sortofclub, from utsiders.With thespreadofcities nd their alues and style,heclub has been extended, oall in principle, lthoughAlexanderHamiltonand JamesMadi-sonspeak quite happily a subjecttowhich shallreturn littlelater in The Federalist f "a chosenbodyofcitizens,whosewis-dommaybestdiscern he true nterestf their ountry,"f "dif-ferent lasses of citizens," nd of the need to rationcitizenshiprights, hat is, not to grantthemautomaticallyo everybody.1Thereareparadoxesnsuch tatements,xplosive aradoxeswhichmaywell account n partforthekindofdynamics fcitizenshipwhich want to explore n thispaper,a dynamicswhich s notprimarilyegal,nor evenpolitical, utprofoundlyocial. n doingso I maywell findmyself empted o alienatea legal termforsociologicalpurposes.The seconddeformationromwhich suffers of coursethatam German, nd that theGermannotionofcitizenshipnvolvesan unfortunatembiguitywhichmayhave contributedn itsownwaytotherefusal fmanyGermans o admitThe Citizenon hislongmarch hrough urope. WhenKant described he "achieve-mentof a civil society enerally dministeringhe law" as "thegreatestroblem fmankind, he olution f which s forced pon

i JamesMadison, "The FederalistNo. 10" and "The FederalistNo. 51," in TheFederalist, dited by Jacob E. Cooke (Middletown:WesleyanUniversity ress,1961).Compare also the argumentforrepresentative overnment, elow.



4/30

CITIZENSHIP AND BEYOND 675himbynature," here ouldbe no doubtthat civilsociety"swhat e meant y brgerlicheesellschaft.2It is worth emark-ing, ncidentally,hat his s theFifth hesisof hisessay alled"The Ideaof a GeneralHistory ith Cosmopolitanntention"- inweltbrgerlicherbsicht,he Citizen n hiswayfrom hecitythroughhe nation-stateo the universal r world-state.)Nearly orty earsater,n Hegel'sOutline fthePhilosophyfRight, hebrgerlicheesellschaftadacquired very ifferentmeaning,o longernultimateurposeworthtrivingor, ut atransitionalhase,ndthe hase fnegationtthat,n theourneyoftheWorld piritowarderfectionna Statewhich asbecomethereality f the moral deal.3 For Hegel,as for Marx twodecadesater, herevolutionaryuality fcitizenshipasbeyonddispute; t had bothgeneralizednd individualizedocietyndthus estroyedheparticularndsolidaryies fthefeudalworld.Eventhe aborcontractetween he ndividualworkernd hisemployerso Marxwasto argue)marked kindof freedomycomparisono nheritedependence.But t sa cynical reedom,based s it were n theneedtoenter,n order osurvive,ntonew ndpseudovoluntaryependence,hebeginninghereforefanotherevolution.He resentedhepurelyndividualndthus,tohismind, rbitraryharacterf civilsociety hich merely"providessafetynd protectionfpropertynd ofpersonalib-erty,"and contrastedtwith heserene eneralityfthe State.The protectionfpropertynHegel, hebuilt-inisparityfthelabor ontractnMarx this swhere he ntended eneralityfthe itizenssumesdubiouslypecificharacter,here hebger-lieheGesellschaftecomes classsociety, ecause the citoyenmergeslmostmperceptiblyith hebourgeois,ndsinceboth,

2Cf. Immanuel Kant, "Idee zu einer allgemeinen Geschichtein weltbrgerlicherAbsicht," n Populre Schriften,dited by Paul Menzer (Berlin, 1911), pp. 21 ff;mytranslation.s Cf. G. W. F. Hegel, Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts,edited by JohannesHoffmeisterHamburg, 1955), especially sec. 182 ff.* Ibid., sec.258.



5/30

676 SOCIAL RESEARCHin German, re calledBrger, hesupersessionf thebrgerlicheGesellschaftmayturn out to abandon thecitizen longwiththebourgeois:NationalSocialism.It is possible,and certainly ewarding, o traceThe Citizeninhis ongmarch rom he Greekpolities nd fromRome throughthe medievalcitiesand therevolutions f theseventeenth,igh-teenth, nd nineteenth enturies;but I shall not do so here. Iam notevengoingto make morethan a passingreference o themorerecenthistory f therelationship etweencitizenshipndsocialclass whichT. H. Marshallhas describedn sucha masterlyfashion. Even if I wanted to do thesethings, could not dothemproperly,orthepractical oncernswhichhaveheldmyat-tentionforsome time have also orientedmy mind. There isprobablyno other dea in humanhistorywhichcombines heas-pirations fman'sneed forequalityand man'sdesirefor ibertyas does thatof citizenship. But in factsuch combinations renever tatic. Every ime,and ofcourseevery ctor n it,has toaskanewwhich s theproblemmostacutely n need of solutionifone seeks societywhichoffershegreatestife chancesto thegreatest umber. I would suggest hat this s a time in whichthere s a need to reconsideromeof theassumptionsnd direc-tions f liberalpolitics. And I cannot oncealfromyouthatthisis oneof the nterests hichmotivateme in thisdiscussion.

Rationality nd CitizenshipThe idea ofcitizenshipscloselyinkedto theall-importanto-tionofmodernity.Modernity,hegreathistorical hemewhichhas spreadfromEurope throughoutheworldsincethe timeofthegreatdiscoveries,n thereal worldas in thatof science,hasbeendefinednmanyways. Max Weber,whodevoted lifetime

to itsunderstanding,aw itsdominantfeaturen what he calledrationalitya complexterm ounravel. It involves alculabilityin an entirelyechnical ense,butalso purposefulction, he need



6/30

CITIZENSHIP AND BEYOND 677togivereasons or udgments,hedevelopmentnd applicationof cientificnowledge,he etting-upforganizations,n exten-sionofformalizedegalrules,ndall this gainst backgroundftraditionalies, nquestionedoyalties,eligiousustificationsfsecularmmobility. ationalityas tsownambiguities,rper-hapsdialectic.ForMaxWeber,t iberates anfrom heunques-tioned onds ftraditionnly odeliver im n theend intoaGehusederHrigkeit,he prison f the bureaucratictate.5There s the mplicit ationalityfthemarket,ndthe ntendedrationalityf theplan, nd their recariouselationshipn theshape frules fthegame.6Butwhateverheambiguitiesndproblems,ationalityescribes he pervasivede-forcef themodernworld,nd ofall societies hichhavebegunto eat theinfectiousruit f thetree fknowledge.Citizenships the nstitutionalounterpartfrationality,otmerelyn idea buta reality,he rystallizationfrationalityntoa socialrole. The modernworld s dominatedythetheme frationalityn itsvalues, venwhere t appears o revolt gainstreason,nd t scharacterizedy he ole fthe itizenn ts ocial,economic,ndpoliticalrganization;oreover,elationsetweenrationalityndcitizenshipreno accident.There s the ommonassumptionhat llmen re endowedwith ertain asicqualitieswhich nable hemobeparts f rationalniverse,communityofcitizens;heres the evident elationshipetween ationality,the mplicitniversalityf the aw, ndcitizenship.t is, n thewords fMaxWeber, haracteristicfrational rlegal uthority(bycontrasto thetraditionalndthe harismaticypes f egiti-mate uthority)hat t is basedon institutedaw,consistingfruleswhich readministeredccordingoexplicit rinciples,ndwhichrevalidfor ll,while t the ame ime indinghemem-bers f communitynlyn this apacity,that as this susually

e Cf. Max Weber, Wirtschaft nd Gesellschaft, dited by JohannesWinckelmann(Tbingen: Mohr, 1956), pp. 125 ff, 59 ff, 42.e Cf.myessay"Market and Plan" in myEssaysin the TheoryofSociety Stanford:StanfordUniversity ress,1968).



7/30

678 SOCIAL RESEARCHexpressed he who obeys merely s an associate, nd merely o'the aw/ .. As an associaten a club,a community,s a memberofa church,n thestate:Brger/' The socialrole of the citizenunderwent cancerousgrowthtself, enevolent t first, ossiblymalevolent ow,a definition fmodernityn terms f the basicsocial positionof the individual:The role of citizendescribesset of fundamentallyqual rights f participation orall thosewhoarefullmembers fthecommunity.This is an essay n social and politicalanalysisratherthanatreatise.Insteadofa systematicefinitionfcitizenshipra com-prehensive resentationfitsdevelopment,etme confinemyselfthereforeomentioninghree lements fthis olewhich an helpus to identifyome of thosemorerecent ocioeconomicnd socio-politicaldevelopments hich,whilesetin motionbythecitizen,might ead beyondcitizenship,nd perhapsbeyondrationalityand modernitys well.The first oint wanttomakeabout the role ofthecitizen sthat t involves set ofequal rights or ll thosewhohold it. Itmaywell be that his s more han one statementlready; qualityand thelegal character f thestatus nd citizenshipmaybe twodifferenthings. What mattersn thepresent ontext s thatcit-izenshipprovides ll thosewho enjoyit with certainestablishedopportunitiesnd commitments,ithrespect o whichthere snodifferenceetweenthem. As citizens,nytwomenare indistin-guishable;but this ackofdistinctionefers orights,hat s,notto propertiesr actionbut to chances, o potential ctions.A second tatementboutcitizenships somewhatmore pecific.In one ofitscentral spects, itizenships a chance toparticipatein the life of the community. Citizenship s, in otherwords,more thantheright o defendthe integrityf one's person al-thoughhabeascorpushasclearly een an integral lement fgen-eralcitizenship.It is theright o takepart n theshaping f theconditionswhichdetermine he community,moreprecisely,he

7Weber,WirtschaftndGesellschaft,. 125.



8/30

CITIZENSHIP AND BEYOND 679right o participaten themaking fthe awsbinding ponallcitizens. t isa debatable ointwhetherhere an be a societynwhichome recitizensndothers ot. I would rgue hat his spossiblendhas nfact ccurrednancient reece,nRome, ndabove ll in themedieval ities nd,by analogy, orporations,swell s inmodern oliticalocieties hich ave xtendeduffragegraduallyndoften atherate. But t is notdebatablewhethertheres citizenshipn countries hichdenyparticipationo allbuta very ew,which onfinet to an uncontrolled inorityfself-appointedulers.There snot: Classical yrannys well asmodern ictatorship,ncludinghatofone-partyureaucracies,exclude itizenshipn the ense fa chance fparticipation.8Then there sa third ointwhichmaywellbe ofcardinalm-portanceoday.Citizenshipsa generalizedight,elatedo mem-bershipn a societyowevertsboundaries ay ehistoricallye-fined.This swhere herelationshipetweenhe itizennd thenation-stateomesn,andwhere henotionsfa person'sitizen-ship ndhisnationalityeem omerge.The mergers probablyaccidental;itizenshipf thecity-stateasbeenreal, nd citizen-shipoftheworld scertainlyonceivable.Butin any asethereisa relationshipetweenheroleofthe itizenndtheextent ftherelevantolitical orat anyrate egal community. s thelaw, nall itsparts,sequally inding or llmembersf society,so citizenshipefines hegeneralizedublicof thosewho areequippedwith qualrightsfparticipationnthe hapingf thissociety.Historically,itizenshipasreplaced otonly cceptedinequalitiesnd the denialofparticipation,ut also corporatestructureshose utonomys part ndparcel fthe feudal yn-drome fpremodernocial tructures.In these hreetatementshavemerelylluded oonequestionwhichmaywellmerit urtheronsideration. an citizenshipt-

8This isnot tosaythat itizenships in theoryr in practicen "indivisible"on-cept. It is perfectlyossible o think f countriesand to namethem where herule of law (Rechtsstaat)s recognizedutparticipations not. The reverses lessplausible, lthough omedeveloping ations fferxamples venof that.



9/30

680 SOCIAL RESEARCHselfbe a privilege, r is a societyn whichsome are citizens ndothersnot a contradictionn terms? I have said thata role hasin fact xisted n ancientGreece or in medievalcitieswhich canbe described s thatof citizen. But the important oint is notterminological. n themodernworld, hedynamicsfcitizenshipwas such thatwe have witnessed nd continueto witnessanapparentlyndomitable xpansionof an originally ery imitedrole. The extension f suffragerom ll taxpayingmen above acertain ge suchas thirtyoall menabouttwenty-one,o all menand women bove twenty-one,o all men and womenabove eigh-teen, ndicates courseof developmentwhich has undoubtedlynot reached ts endyetwithrespect o politicalparticipation,ndwhichhas implications orother spectsof therole ofcitizen aswell. Once theseedofcitizenship as been planted n a society,it will grow ike ivy,not to saylike weeds,until its outgrowthhas covered s manymembers f a communityn as largea seg-ment ftheir ocial ives s is atall possible. Thus thegeneralizedright o participaten equal termswhichwe call citizenshipon-sumesother,moredifferentiatedocial roles. As the citizenbe-comesThe Citizen,he not onlyextendsthemembership f thecategory ut also thesubstance nd significancef membership.Is it necessaryo quote Tocqueville at thispoint? This is, inotherwords,wherewe encounter hevagaries fthe citizen n thewaytohisself-denial.T. H. Marshall, n his analysis f Citizenshipnd Social Class,has posedthe mportant uestionofwhetherhestatus f citizen-ship s compatiblewith nequalities f socialclass. In its earliestversion, itizenship avemenlegal powers, ivilrights; ut thesewerebound to remain mpty romises or hosewho were ackingnotonlythe economicmeansto makeuse of thembut even thepoliticalrights o make sure that therulesof the law were notsystematicallyurned otheadvantage f somegroups ver others.Thus politicalcitizenship ame to supplementegal citizenship.The rights ovoteand to be elected, o formpolitical groups, ovoice political views freely, dded important lements to the



10/30

CITIZENSHIP AND BEYOND 681status;but theytoo were bound to remain insufficiento longas economic nd social differencesrevented eople from cquir-ing the experience, he organizational rerequisites,ndeed themeans to exercise heirrights. This is why, n Marshall'sview,a set of social rights f citizenshipwas needed to give this roleits fullmeaning old-agepensions,unemploymentenefits, ub-lic health nsurance,egal aid, a minimumwage, ndeed a guar-anteedminimumstandard of living. Thus "the basic humanequalityof membership . . has been enriched withnew sub-stance nd investedwith a formidablerrayofrights... It hasbeenclearlydentified iththe status fcitizenship."

The DeclineofDiversityMarshall stoppedhis analysisat this point. Indeed, and inkeepingwith the mood of many proven championsof socialcitizenship ightsn the 1950s,he suggested hat "the nequalitiespermitted,nd evenmolded,bycitizenship" o longerconstituteclassdistinctionsnd therefore o not giverise to class strugglesbut become"socially cceptable." 0 But are there ny inequali-tieswhichare molded,or even permitted,y citizenship?Mar-shall himselfmakesthe specificpoint: "Through education in

its relationswithoccupationalstructure,itizenship peratesasan instrument f social stratification/' And we rememberMichaelYoung'smeritocratictopiawhichhascarried hisnotionto itsextreme. But is it true or,to be lesstheoretical, as it infactbeen true that the championsof citizenshiphave taken"occupational tructure"nd "social stratification"orgranted sdifferentiatedtructures,hat s, structuresf inequality?9Thomas H. Marshall, Citizenshipand Social Class (Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-versity ress,1950),p. 9.io ibid., pp. 75 ff.ii Ibid., p. 67.



11/30

682 SOCIAL RESEARCHEducation s a case in point. When I myself leaded,a decadeago,for education s a civilright/' heargumentwas one whichis familiar oday.12Equalityofeducational pportunitys a basicrightof everycitizen,because educationis both a prerequisiteand a dimension f full social and politicalparticipation.Suchequalityofopportunitys threatened ot onlyby legal obstacles,or byovert conomic nd social barriers, ut by lessvisible bar-riers s well. Working-classhildrengrowup at a considerablesocialdistancefrom nstitutionsfhigher earning, distanceofinformation, distanceofmotivation, distanceof culture. Itis thusnecessary ot only to abolish school feesand to supplyschool buses and day schools,but also to informparentsandchildren ystematicallyboutopportunities hich re available tothem, o motivate hem forhigher ducation, o enable them togo alongthisroad withouthavingto abandon theculturalattri-butes of their social origin. Clearly, itizenship hus conceivedextendsfarbeyondeven Marshall'snotionof its "social" aspects,and somewhere long this road one crossesa line where theabolitionof obstacles that is, of differencesslides over fromthecreation fequal opportunitieso the creation fequal status.Attheendof theroad andbyno means n fictionnly equalityof educationalopportunitys thoughtof as requiringthe re-placement ftheQueen's Englishbyclassdialects, nd therear-rangementf curricula o as to enable childrenof all groupstosucceed equally, or at least in proportion o the size of theirgroups. "We will,"toquoteChristopher encks,have to changethe rules of thegameso as to reduce the rewards f competitivesuccess nd the costsof failure." 3 Comprehensivechools arecreatednot to offer more varied set of opportunitieso morechildren ut to organize heequalityof all.Daniel Bell has recently nalyzedthisparticular spectof the12Cf. myBildung ist Brgerrecht Hamburg: Nannen-Verlag,1965).13ChristopherJencks, nequality: A Reassessmentof the Effect of Family andSchoolingin America (New York: Basic Books, 1972),pp. 8 ff.



12/30

CITIZENSHIP AND BEYOND 683dynamics fcitizenshipn a chapter n "Meritocracynd Equal-ity"ofhis The ComingofPost-Industrialociety. We owe himmany nsights.The "change n socialtemper" owhichhe refersis in factone of those umps fromquantityto qualitywherealittlemorecitizenship hangesthe entirecomplexionof society.In education hismeans transition rom qualityofopportunityto theequalityof the result of the educationaleffort.Already,so Bell concludes, the conceptof equalityof resulthas becometheArchimedean ointofa majornew efforto provide philo-sophical foundation a concept of justice as fairness for acommunal ociety." 4Nor is thisprocess onfined o education. One otherexampleis of particular nterest orreasons of fact and analysis. Soci-ologists sed to distinguishwithunderstandable aivete betweentwokindsof differencesf social status, scribed and achieved.Achieved statusrefers o positionswhich people can reach bytheirown efforts;uch positions re capable of redefinition,reobjectsof politicalaction a certain ncomelevel,forexample,membershipn clubswhich re recognized o indicate ocial posi-tion,an occupationwithhigheror lower prestige. There areother ocialpositionswhichescape (so itwas assumed)theeffortsof human achievementbecause theyare based on natural dif-ferences.They maybe defined n one wayor another,held inhigheror lower esteem,but as differentositions theyare in-escapablygiven,theirstatus s ascriptive age and sex are themostobvious examples. Now it is a notable factthat the ex-tension fcitizenship as reached, n recentyears, heapparentlyunsurmountable alls of ascribedstatus. Men and women arenotmerely o be giventhe suffragend equal wages forequalwork, utthey re supposed obe treated s equals in all respects;societys to be arranged n such a waythatthe differencesanbe ignored. An analogous developmenthas long set in with

i*Daniel Bell, The Coming f Post-IndustrialocietyNewYork:Basic Books,1973), .433.



13/30

684 SOCIAL RESEARCHrespect oage,one oftheoldest ources fdifferentialistributionofpower.Citizenships a set ofequal rights,nd rightsre in one respectchances, pportunitiesomakechoices. It is commonplace odaythat suchrights annot be givenbywriting hem nto constitu-tions nd laws. But theprocess fcreating heconditions nderwhichcitizenship ightsbecome real has gone farbeyond thelegal,political, nd socioeconomic ealms. As social groupsandtheir pokesmenhave discovered he intrinsicncompletenessfequal opportunities,nd thepoliticalpayofff moreradicalde-mands, heyhave turned heir ttention o inequalitieswhichareat thecore ofanysocialstructure.The distinction etween qualrights nd equal status,betweena levelingof opportunities orchoice and a levelingof the choicesthemselves, as come to beblurred nd eventuallybandoned. It maybe argued,ofcourse,thatthedistinction as at all times n parta defensemechanismbythe havesagainstthehave-nots.By abandoning t,however,imperceptiblyt first,hen withgrowingmomentum,he exten-sion of theequal rights f citizenship reates conditionunderwhichthese ightsosemuchof theirmeaning:they ffer hoiceswhich can no longerbe made, theypromisedifferentialppor-tunitieswhich no longer exist. If it is true that citizenshippresupposes differentiatedtructure o which its chancesarerelated, t now appearsthat the dynamics f citizenship ets inmotiona processof destructuringf societywhich in the enddeniesthecitizenthe fruit f his labors.There are aspects f thisdevelopmentwhichare more seriousthan can be demonstratedn thiscursory nalysis.15A returnto Rousseau is in fact nvariably return to Hobbes, and theaurea aetas of communalhappinesshas a frighteningendencyto turnout to be a heliumomniumcontra mnescallingfor aw

is Amongthem the important heoreticalpoint raisedbyPlato and Aristotle like,accordingto whom the political community s inconceivable among entirelyequalbeings.



14/30

CITIZENSHIP AND BEYOND 685and orderto hold togetherhe unstructuredemnantsf thesearchforequality. It mightbe useful o direct he under-standable oncernwiththe legitimationf inequality o con-siderationsf thiskind. For Daniel Bell becomes nfortunatelyandsomewhatnexpectedlyaivewhenhe begins oarguethat"a societyhat oesnothave tsbestmen ttheheadof ts eadinginstitutionssa sociologicalndmoral bsurdity."6 Thisneverhappens, f course;whathappens s that ocieties efinewhatis "good"and "best" n newways. "Authority,"aysBell, "isa competenceasedon skill, earning,alent, rtistryr somesimilarttribute.nevitablyt eads o distinctionsetweenhosewho resuperiorndthosewho arenot." 7I can follow his rguments far s it goes but thenwhatare therelevant kills nd talents? Is therenot an implicitassumptionerethatmen are notonlydifferentynaturebutthat hesedifferencesstablishne naturalhierarchy? geandsex,knightlyirtuesndcommercialalent,measuredntelligenceandthe bilityopersuade,ndmany ther ndowments,reallpossible ases ofdistinctionnd thusofauthority. he pointaboutthedynamicsf equality s not thatnaturaldifferenceshavetobe reassertedgainst galitarianism;hepoint s,rather,thatmadebyTocqueville, ohnStuartMill,and Max Weber:The Citizen s in danger f destroyingheveryworldof dif-ferentiatedhoiceswhichhe set out to conquer or ll; and theresultingorld,with ts ackofhierarchynddiversity,fstruc-turaldifferentiation,aybecome n open invitation o thosecrude nddestructiveowerswhich he mature itizenwassup-posed o banish romheworld f menforever.

TheTrend owardarticipatoryemocracyThe second oint want omake bout hedynamicsfcitizen-16Bell, The ComingofPost-IndustrialSociety,p. 454.17Ibid., p. 453.



15/30

686 SOCIAL RESEARCHshipresembles hefirstn one respect. Championsofcitizenshiphave alwaysassumed thatthe new statusprovidesequal oppor-tunities o choose in a world of unequal choices. They under-estimated he radicalness f The Citizenbypresupposing struc-tureduniverseof social choices. It has become apparentthatThe Citizen s liable todestroyhatuniverse t theriskof reduc-inghisown field f action. Withrespect opoliticalparticipation,thecorrespondingssumption as been even moreexplicit. Notone of the great theorists f government nder conditions ofcitizenship as in factadvocated a system f "pure democracy."Alongwith puremonarchy'*nd "pure aristocracy," ohnStuartMill explicitly enounced uch"unbalancedgovernments,"8 ndin doingso he merely choedthe authorsof The Federalist, rEdmundBurke, ndeedJohnLocke,and manyothers ightbackto Plato's preference or mixed constitutions. nstead,modernpoliticaltheorists ave advocatedrepresentativeovernmentsthe adequate framework orthe citizen to expresshis politicalchoicesand takepart n the life of therepublic. But represen-tativegovernmentmeans,of course,thatsome citizens re moreequal thanothers, r else thatgeneralcitizenship ights f par-ticipation re restricted:while all have the rightto vote,andto be elected,to join politicalparties nd takepart in politicaldebate,onlya feware in positions o exercise heright o enactlaws and thus odetermineheconditions efining eople'sstatus,includingpossibly he status of citizenship; here are ordinarycitizens nd representativeitizens. Again,in otherwords,theidea of an equal status fcitizenship asassociatedwiththe moreor less explicitassumption f an unequallystructured niverseofparticipation,nd again it appears today the championsofcitizenshipnderestimatedhedynamics f the dea.Like social stratification,epresentativeovernments not in-trinsic o theidea ofcitizenship. Indeed,it maybe arguedthat

18John tuartMill,Utilitarianism,iberty,ndRepresentativeovernmentNewYork: E. P. Dutton, 1910),p. 316.



16/30

CITIZENSHIP AND BEYOND 687historicallyhe notionof continuous nd immediate articipationin the politicalprocesswas by no means alien to citizenship.There is more to citizenship,nd to democracyn Switzerlandtoday,than the remnants f participatoryemocracy, ut it isworth ememberinghe model: the citizen s identifieds belong-ing to a narrowly ircumscribed, enerally ocal, or at leastregional ommunity; e is frequentlyalled upon to decide sub-stantivessuesalongwithall his fellowcitizens,deallyin opendebate, n theLandsgemeinde r themarketplace;whatgovern-ment xists s supposedto administerhe decisions fthepeople,not to lead. This notion of governmentnvokes another dea,thatof thedelegate. If for reasonsof the size of a community,or the timeit takes to accomplish giventask, t is impossiblefor ll citizens oparticipatell thetime, hey hoosefrom mongthemselvesersons o defend nd implement heirviewsas dele-gateswith a firmmandate,not as representativesreeto maketheir wn choicesonce they re elected. JohnStuartMill clearlydoes not like the dea, buthe is honest noughto say: "Howeverwrong, herefore,r howeverfoolish,we may thinkit in theelectorso convert heir epresentativento a delegate, hat tretchoftheelectoral rivilegebeing natural nd not improbable ne,thesameprecautions ughtto be takenas if it were certain." 9It is, as we shall see, difficulto take precautions gainst thevoraciousnessfThe Citizen.

In order ounderstandhedynamics f thecitizen s participantinpoliticaldecisions,t isuseful orememberome oftheclassicalarguments orrepresentativeovernment.Apartfromthe sizeof communities, nd the corresponding echnicalproblemsofdirectdemocracy r even delegategovernmentas distinct romoccasional asks uch as thatoftheElectoralCollegein the UnitedStates),two arguments ecur. One is in termsof quality,theother n terms fclass. Madisonreadily dmitsthatrepresenta-tivegovernments a deviationfrom n egalitariandeal, as even19 bid.,p. 316;my mphasis.



17/30

688 SOCIAL RESEARCHthe wordingof his argument gainst democracy nd for therepublic etrays:

The effectf the . . differences, .. torefinendenlarge ublicviews, ypassing hem hroughhemedium fa chosen odyofcitizens hosewisdommaybestdiscern he true nterestf theircountry,nd whosepatriotismnd loveof ustice,willbe leastlikely osacrificet to temporaryrpartial onsiderations.20The point has been made in otherways,but it generallyamounts osuggestinghatrepresentativeovernments necessaryin orderto select thebest and entrust hem fora timewiththeaffairs f the community. Madison was not unaware of thedifficultiesf thisnotion,much less so Mill, who listeda wholecatalogueof difficultiesHow can one make sure thatthe bestare reallychosen? How can those who do not have certainqualities themselvesudge themin others? tc.), but the pointremainsthatforthe classicaltheorists f representativeovern-mentthescopeofgeneralcitizenship emains imited;participa-tion of all is regardedas essentially poradic and in a sensereactive.The otherargumentfor representative overnments evenmore unashamedly ne of interest, ot to say class privilege.AlexanderHamiltonput this n rather musingtermswhenheargued that it is not physically ossible for all classes to beactuallyrepresentedn decision-makingodies. Accordingto

Hamilton, his s notnecessary,ither, ecause someclassesrepre-sentothersperfectlyforexample,"mechanics nd manufactur-ers" are in any case best represented y "merchants," ecause"they furnishthe materials for mercantile enterpriseandindustry."1This convenient ivision of labor was no doubt supposed toprevent heparticipationf social groups, lasses, n actual pro-portionto their size, and instead introducean intermediateelementofrepresentation.To quote Mill once again:

20Madison, "The Federalist No. 10," in The Federalist,p. 62.2i AlexanderHamiton, "The FederalistNo. 35," in The Federalist,p. 219.



18/30

CITIZENSHIP AND BEYOND 689In that alselyalleddemocracyhichs really heexclusiveuleof theoperativelasses, ll others eingunrepresentednd un-heard, heonly scapefromlass egislationn itsnarrowest,ndpolitical gnorancen itsmost angerous,orm, ould ie in suchdispositionss theuneducatedmight aveto choose ducated ep-resentatives,ndto defer o their pinions.22I thinkthere s a better case forrepresentativeovernmentthansome of itsadvocateshave advanced,and I shall return oit presently; ut theargumentsuoted demonstratelmostwith-out furthernalysiswhy t is that,once The Citizenwas born,he did notrestcontentwiththe place he was assigned s a par-ticipant n the political process. An originally imited set ofparticipation ightsprovided lever fordemandingmore. Upto a point,this was a demand within n undisputedframeworkof representativeovernment: he abolition of unequal votingrights, he extension f suffrage,ven highervoterturnout, hecreation f conditions or heorganizationfpoliticalparties, tc.Butdevelopmentsidnotstopthere; hey ave ed,morerecently,to a revival of the demand forparticipatory emocracywhichhas considerableramificationsf a constitutionalnd politicalcharacter. Perhaps this trend is not yet as concentrated ndmassiveas thatwhich leads fromequal opportunities o equalresults, ut someof the markers n the road from qual partici-pation rightsto equal participation tselfcan no longer beoverlooked.Let me mention fewexampleswithout xamining heminany detail. The demand forconstitutional lementsof directdemocracys growing. In somecountries,uchas France, t hasbeen institutionalized;n others,uch as Britain nd Germany,tis debated for certaincases. More significanthan organizedreferenda,r the direct lections o importantffices,s therapidgrowth f "citizens' nitiatives" ofmore or lessad hoc organiza-tionsto prevent he constructionf a nuclearreactor,demand

the abolitionof the death penalty or the reverse), oin forces22Mill,Utilitarianism,iberty,nd Representativeovernment,. 324.



19/30

690 SOCIAL RESEARCHforestablishing indergartenacilities,tc. While such activitiesare sporadicand often hort-lived,heirgrowthmaywell markthe beginning f an increasinglyrgentdemandfordirectpar-ticipation. The community oliticsmovement hampionedbyBritishLiberals hasmet withwidespread upport.It is partof the same trendthat n manycountries herepre-sentative s assumingfeatures f the delegate. To begin with,thishappens in a practicalmanner. Candidatesforoffice reseverelycross-examined; etween elections, constituency ndpartymeetings ecomemore frequent; rticulation f voterin-terests reates yardstick ormeasuring he "loyalty"of repre-sentatives;possiblythe number of cases where representativesare not reelected s growing. In some places, the trendgoesfurther;n a number of Germancities,the imperativMandathas become a fact, f an unconstitutionalne, for Social Demo-cratic fficeolders.As thosewhohold office ecomedelegates,t is almostnaturalthatthe demand forequal representationto use the word ina less technical ense) should grow. Merchants an clearlynolongerrepresentmechanics; heybothhave to be representednproportion o their mportancen the population;and likewisewomen,people fromall regions,membersof variousreligiousand ethnicgroups, nd whatever thercategories re relevant.And in orderto safeguard heparticipationf all in everything,delegate overnments coupledwithorganized o-called parities"in governing odies: Drittelparittthat s, equal representationof professors,ssistants, nd students) in university enates,parittischeMitbestimmungequal representationf capital andlabor) in the boards of industrial nterprises.If thepresentationf this ist of trendsbetrays n undertoneof irony, do notwantto be misunderstood.Participations acivil righttoo, and the originalnotionof citizenship ertainlyimposed unjustified estrictionsn its exercise. Indeed, everyone of themeasures ited,from ommunity oliticsto codeter-mination,fromcitizens' nitiatives o the demand for pledges



20/30

CITIZENSHIP AND BEYOND 691fromrepresentatives,as its justice and logic. And yet thedynamics f participation rovides notherexampleof how theidea ofcitizenship as releaseda developmentwhich n the endis liable to defeat ts ownpurpose. As equality,when t spreadsfromopportunitieso results,makes choicesimpossible, o par-ticipation an lead to a verzuilingto use a colorfulDutch ex-pression), "pillarization" nd cementing f the structures fgovernment hich makes t all but meaningless o take part intheprocess fmakingdecisions.Take the case of delegationor (as Mill calls it) pledges,theimperativemandategivento elected officeholders.t is certainlyrightn principle hat hosewho hold elective fficehould feeland be committed o representingthe views and interests ftheir lectors; n thepast,theprincipleofrepresentationas attimes been grossly bused. But if the oppositecase is drivento its extreme, ts result is equally frighteningn theory ndin practice. In theoryt meansthatthe holder of electiveofficeis unable to make any move withoutthe explicitapproval ofhis electors. Such approval is hard to come by; it takestime,but above all long, lmost nterminableiscussions.The delegateis unableto reactquicklyto newsituations nd problems. He isabove all unableto ead,that s,tointroduce n innovation eforeit has been acceptedby all; he has neither ncentivenor realpossibilityorbeingahead ofhiselectorate.This is bad enough,for it means inactioninsteadof action, immobilitynstead ofprogress. In practice, he situation s even worse, nd not un.characteristicallyo. For, in fact, ittle analysisis needed toshow that the representativeurneddelegatewill become thespokesman or a rather mall group of citizens: not the entireelectoratebut a party organization, nd not the whole partyorganization,ut onlythe activistswho can afford o meet fre-quently nd for onghoursofinconsequential ebate.The pointbearsgeneralization.I submitthatthe permanentparticipationf all in everythings in fact a definition f totalimmobility.Instead of the dialectic of leadershipand control



21/30

692 SOCIAL RESEARCHwhich uaranteeshat nnovation akesplacebut s notunchecked,it would mean a mixtureof permanent heoretical ebate andpermanent ractical naction. It has to be admittedthatpartsof some European universities ave reached this stageof rigormortis, ut there re less extremefequally telling xamples. Isit an accident that Switzerland,where a popular majority srequired,has introducedwomen'ssuffrageaterthan almostallother countries nd only recently ejected, n a plebiscite, hereduction f thevoting ge to eighteen? Contraryo the beliefsofmany,nnovation nd participationre notnaturalallies; andan optimalbalance betweenthe tworequiresrestrictionsn thepermanentparticipation f all in everythingmajorityvoting,forexample,or representative overnment.My own argumentin favor fconstitutionalrrangements ith trong epresentativeelementswould in anycase not be based on reasons of class orthe qualityof representatives,ut on the need for innovativegovernment.This is the theoretical ide of things, he case for limitsonparticipation.Here too,The Citizen s about to overreach im-self,to create conditionswhichwould make the veryprincipleuselesswhichhe triesto establish. If the political society sorganized n such a way thatall groupsare represented very-where, nd representativesre in factdelegates, hen decisionsbecomevirtuallympossible,nd participationosesall meaning.All thatis left s a rightto be present t endlessdebates,butno longer chancetodo things,oeffecthanges, owevermodestthey or thecontributionfthe ndividual itizen o them maybe. But thepracticalproblem s more difficulttill. I did notuse the wordsrigormortis ightly. Even a slowdownof theprocessof innovation an be deadlyin modernsocieties. It isin factalmost a definition f a revolutionaryituation, n anycase ofa situationwhichcalls fordramatic hanges. I have felttemptedt times o analyzeMarx'snotionofthefinal ommunistsociety, r Rousseau's romantic mage of the freeconsensusoffreemen, s involuntaryescriptionsfstates n whichproblems



22/30

CITIZENSHIP AND BEYOND 693can onlybe solvedbyextreme uppression,y tyranny.Nothingcalls forHerrschafts much as the attempted ealizationof theUtopian deal of Genossenschaft,nd nothingfor the disenfran-chisementf the itizen s thepractice f totalparticipation.Thisis where the destructuringf society nd the verzuiling f thepoliticalprocess ytotalparticipationoin hands.

SectoralCitizenshipKantassumed hat, t least ftherewasto be lastingpeace,thescopeof citizenshipwould graduallybe extendedgeographicallyas well as in substance. The nation-state ad already enlargedthe legal and politicalspace in whichthe citizenexercisedhisrights; s worldcitizens, ll men will one daybe members f thesamecommunityf law and government. n someways, sup-pose, some such idea is partof the rarelydebated assumptionsabout progresswhichmanyof us carrywithus. We may aughaboutthemanwhomanufacturesorhimself passport s WorldCitizenNo. 1; but I suppose the bearer of a passportof theRepublic of Bavaria would have as much trouble as WorldCitizenNo. 1, whereas , forexample,hold a passportof theEuropean Communitywhich is recognizedby the immigrationauthorities f nine countries. Yet there s something uriouslyone-dimensionalbout these ssumptions. Certainly hisparticu-lar dynamics fcitizenship as been rather ess in evidencethananother ne,pointingn theoppositedirection,which n itsturnmay yet ead to a pointwhere there s a passport or the citizenofWales, or of Flanders, r of Bavaria,and I wonderwhetherthis s not themostserious llustration f the virulence of theidea ofcitizenship.Citizenship,t least n its modernversion,wasnotonly inkedto the development f largerpolitical entities,nations,but italsoreplaced oyaltieswhichboundmento specific roups, uilds,corporations, niversities,y generalized oyalties. The realm



23/30

694 SOCIAL RESEARCHofthe aw as a bodyof rules which s applicableto all expandedalongwith itizenship; itizenshipnvolves hecreation fa pub-licwhichfinds tspoliticalexpressionunderconditions frepre-sentative overnment)n a parliamentwhose authority xtendsin principleover the whole of society. But of course,whilecorporationsnd organizationsn thisprocess ost theirspecialstatus, r found it reduced,theydid not disappearas separateentities economic enterprises nd churches,universities ndarmies, rganizationsnd associations fmanykinds,thefamily.Citizenship efined herole of themember f a community ithrespect o thoseruleswhich re common o all, and thusbindingon all institutionsnd organizations,ut it did notas suchapplyto their own internalstructures.More than that,citizenshipemphasized hegeneral thecommunitynder aw,theelectorate,thegeneralizedmarketplacealled public at theexpenseof theparticular; ut here as elsewhere hedynamics fcitizenshipwasgreater hanthe limitations f itsorigins.JrgenHabermas has done forthe analysisof the structuralchangeof the generalizedpublic what T. H. Marshall did forthatof citizenshipnd social class,exceptthatHabermas takesa moregloomyview of things. The generalizedpublic, in hisview, s characteristicf an early, nd misleading,iberal distinc-tionbetween tate and society. Generalizedrules reflect br-gerlichpublic, in which "the intactautonomyof society s aprivate pheremadeitpossible oremove pecial nterest ositionsfromthe substanceof legislation nd confinenormative ctionto thegeneralconditions f thebalance of interests."3 As thestate egins ointerfere ith he ocialorder, owever Marshall'ssocial rightsof citizenship "the generality f the norm as aprinciple annotbe sustained." This means, mongother hings,that the "relativelyhomogeneouspublic of reasoningprivateindividuals"givesway to organizedsectoral nterests; he onepublicgiveswayto severalpublics; citizenship an no longerbe

23JrgenHabermas,Strukturwandel er ffentlichkeitNeuwied: Hermann Luch-terhand,1962),p. 196.



24/30

CITIZENSHIP AND BEYOND 695thought f as a generalized tatus nabling people to participatein the ocial and politicalprocess. In the modernmassdemocracybased on socially ommitted overnment,

the ommunicationontext f a public anbebroughtboutonlyinsuch way hat heformaliyhort-circuitedirculation ithin"quasi-public"pinion s linked ndcombined ith he nformalrealm f those pinions o farnonpublic yvirtue f a criticalpublicityhichs arousednthe nternalublics forganization.24In all its abstraction,his is nothingshort of the theoryofwhathas come to be called the democratization f society. Theoriginalcitizenhad one generalpolitical public as his market-place. But the developmentof citizenship tselfincreasinglystimulated he demand for an extension f citizenship ights oother ealms nd sectors fsociety. If and whensocial structureintervenes etweenthe individualand government,he demandis bound to arise foran organization f the varioussegments fsocietyn a manner hat s analogousto ifnot identicalwith thatof the general public. The economic citizen, the citizen inuniform,he churchof citizens, re born all contradictionsnterms nd at the same time apparentlynevitableconsequencesofthe idea of citizenship.Once again, it is neithersurprising or in itselfregrettablethatthe idea of citizenshiphouldspreadfrom he whole to itsparts. It couldbe argued, o be sure,thatthe rulesofthewhole

are not easilytransferredo all parts. The citizenin uniformwill underall conditionshave to tolerate elations f super- ndsubordinationwhichthe generalcitizenwould not accept; andwhateverconomicor industrial emocracymeans, t can hardlywork as a system f governmentnd oppositionwith regularelectionsnvolving hepossibilityfa changeofpower. But thismerely rovesthat thebasic rights f participationmbodiedinthestatus fcitizenship ave differentractical, lmosttechnicalconsequences n differentectors f society. As a principle, he"democratization"f society eems as reasonable and legitimate

24ibid., pp. 269 ff



25/30

696 SOCIAL RESEARCHas equalityof opportunitynd full politicalparticipation. Butas withthesetwoaspectsofcitizenship, emocratizationoo is aprocesswhich is liable to extendbeyondthe point at which itincreases herights f citizens o thecreation f newand difficultproblems.Industrialdemocracys an important ase in point. Let usassumethat an entrepreneur,nd the board to whichhe is re-sponsible, iscover hatan enterpriseannotcontinue ts opera-tions. Sales have droppedconsistently,osts have risen,furtherrationalizations not possible, onger-termredictions re bad(so we assume,althoughof course the decisionmay in factbemore diosyncratic); orkers re toldthat hefirmwill closedownat a giventime. But theydo not acceptthis decision. Instead,theytake possessionof the factory,ake chargeof productionthemselves,egin to organizetheir own marketingystem, is-tributethe profitsmong them. Are theynot in some senseexercising itizenship ights n the sphereof industry?To besure,the case of the Lip watchfactorys extreme;but manyotherdevelopments oint in the same direction, speciallyor-ganizedcodetermination.This has rightly een describedas asyndicalistotion, essbecauseofthe role it ascribes o thetradeunionsthanbecause of theregression rom totaleconomywithits largermarket mbeddedin a politicalsociety o a seriesofrelatively eparateenterprises,onsumers, overnmentgencies.Lip, ofcourse, xisted n a worldwhichwasrather emote romits own aspirations; he verydifferencenabled theworkers ora whileto sell theirproducts. Nevertheless,he case raisesmanyof theproblems fsectoral itizenship: houldthepolicebe calledin to enforce alidgeneralrules? In theactualcase,many rguethattheminister esponsiblemade themistakeof not doing soimmediately; ut it is clear that industrialdemocracy n theenterpriseevel tends to weaken in some cases render inap-plicable generalrules of law and insteadproduceits own sec-toralrules. Alongwiththis,anotheraspectof the public dis-appears themarket; or hemarkets essentiallyommon, rans-parent, nd unified. Sectoralcitizenswould tend to replace it



26/30

CITIZENSHIP AND BEYOND 697by negotiated xchangeof goods,bartertrade. This does notwork erywell; itcertainlyosescomplexquestions fan economyis intended o growor to survive n a wider, nternationalmar-ket. (Yugoslavia's politicalfactories"maybe modelsofone kindofdemocracy,utthey re economicruins.) The sectoral itizenfindshimself nable in the end to exercisehis rights ffectivelybecausehe is bound to discover hathis own sector annot liveby itself;by pushing sectoralcitizenshipto its extreme,hesevered heoutsideties he needed to makehis own sectorwork.Once again,thebrevity f theanalysis eads to rather xtremestatementsf whatare in factbut trends. Still,the demand tocreateFreirume, anctuaries rotected rom nterventiony thegeneralpublic,and thisnot as private pacesbut as social institu-tions, s growing, nd it results n an increasing ragmentationof thepolitical as well as the economicand social) community.There is a demand forspecific ightsof workers, f students,of churchmembers; nd a denial of therightof thegeneralizedpublic, including parliaments nd law-enforcementgencies,togovern n thesesectors. And as the victory f the generalizedcitizen ver thefeudalmember fa corporation, guild,a house-hold or villagemarked gain in individualchancesofparticipa-tion and thecollective bilityfor nnovation, o the refeudaliza-tion whichThe Citizeneffectsy applying hegeneralprincipleof his existence o specific ectors arrieswith it the dangerof*immobility,neffectiveness,conquestof territories hichturnout to be barren. Societies s a whole become ungovernableftheir ectors efuse,n the name of citizenship ights, o be gov-erned, nd this n turncannotfail to affect heabilityof sectorsto survive: heparadoxof The CompleteCitizen.

The Taskfor New LiberalismThe classical citizenas an ideal type nvokes lmostnaturallythesocialworld of classical iberalism:equal rights o choose ina world of unequal alternatives, articipation n a systemof



27/30

698 SOCIAL RESEARCHrepresentativeovernment, generalized public of individualswhich afeguardshe rules of the market f whichall are a part.Let me leave no doubt that thisclassicalcitizen s, in myview,a very mperfectreature ndeed. Progressiveiberalshave re-gardedtheprinciple f citizenshipt all times s a challengeforsocial, economic,and political action. And while historicallymanyof the rights ssociatedwithcitizenship odayhave beenbattledforbysocialists,manyothers fromuniversal uffrageothe civil rightto an education are liberal principles. And itis no accident that wider participation,ncludingcommunitypolitics, as been included n thepoliciesof someliberalparties,suchas thatofBritain;whereas heFreiburg rogram f Germanliberalsmade systemsf industrial odeterminationnd of profitsharingwhichbenefit ndividuals ather hanorganizationsomeoftheirmajortenets.Nevertheless,he conclusion s inescapabletodaythat the dy-namics fcitizenship ascrossed,r is about tocross, linebeyondwhich t defeats hepurposewhichset it in motion that s, thecreation of societies and politieswhich offer he greatest ifechances othegreatest umber. Today,a liberaldefense rogramis conceivabledesigned o safeguard hebeneficial ffectsf citi-zenship gainst hedangers f tsperversionyperfection.Thereare so one might rgue limitsbeyondwhichequalityofoppor-tunitymustnot be pushed in orderto maintain differentiatedopportunitiesorchoice. So let us have a mixedpublic-privateschoolsystem yall means, nd let us put a limit to theattemptto createequal opportunities y politicalaction somewhere, tthe age of eleven forexample,or perhapsfifteen.There arelimits, lso, beyondwhich full participation f all mustnot bepushedif it is not to immobilize he politicalsystem nd thusmakeparticipationelf-defeating.epresentativeovernment ayhave to be reconsideredn some of its practical spects;but, ifanything,t should provideformore ratherthan less chancesof leadership. There are limits,finally, eyondwhich sectoralcitizenshipmustnot be allowedto go so we avoid an ungovern-



28/30

CITIZENSHIP AND BEYOND 699able fragmentationhich ugurspovertylongwithunprotectedanarchy. Insistence n theneed forgeneral awsmaywell leadus to strengthennclusivesocial units,not nation-statesmerelybut,forexample, heEuropeanCommunity.I would subscribe o theseconclusions, ut I do not believethat heypenetrate arenough. The developments hich havetried o describe re profound nd serious. Even ifthey re, inany givencountrynd its society, eflected y specific raditionsand faultings f historical xperience, here s every ndicationthatthey re sweeping heworld, tsmostadvancedpartsfirst,butquite possibly thers oonafterward*Modernitys changingits flavor; ndeed, the themeof modernitymaywell be abouttofadeaway n favor fa new,as yetundefinedhemeofhistory.Daniel Bell speaksofthe"communal ociety." Certainly,n thegreathistoricaltruggle etweenHerrschaftnd Genossenschaftdare I say: Hobbes and Rousseau? it would seem to be thelatter, he sideofRousseau,ofassociation ather han mperativeco-ordination,which is gaining ground. There is much talktoday bout equality, ess about liberty, ut it is above all thethird nd long-ignoredattlecry f the FrenchRevolutionwhichseemsto be gainingground fraternit,r solidarity,s modernpolitical anguagepreferst.I do not proposeto go intoanycloseranalysis f such trendsat theend of whatwas intendedto be a somewhat nconclusiveanalysis. But I would like to concludeby makingthreerelatedpoints. One is an observation, he main thesis of this paper.There are historical orces oo powerful o be contained;citizen-ship is one of them. Once a grouphas achievedits immediatepurpose n the name of citizenship, new group takesup thetorch. This process, t seems, n the end leads to the creationof conditionswhich are not onlya farcryfrom hose which setit in motion,which is to be expectedand desired,but whichare liable to rob citizenship f itsmeaning. There is, in otherwords, suicidal strain n The Citizen,a deathdrive which isveryvident oday.



29/30

700 SOCIAL RESEARCHBut this is my second point such metaphorsmustnot bemisunderstood. t is rarely ny good to bemoanhistorical rends,however egrettablend even distastefulnemayfind hem,muchless to hold up a heroicpast againsta decadentpresent. Thedevelopmentswhich I have sketchedmark literallyenormousprogress rommanypointsof view. Societies which kept theoverwhelmingumber fpeople nnarrowlyircumscribedlaces,

permittinghemneithermobilitynor anykind of participationother than serviceforothers,have been transformednto greatreservoirsfopportunity, ithall the insecurities,angers, isksthatgo withopenness, ut withthechances,oo which thisoffers.The privilegeostbysome s infinitelyutweighed ytheoppor-tunities ainedbymany, specially ince the loss of privilege sgenerally elative, hat s, not a reductionof actual chances,ofincome, f room formaneuver, ut a reduction f the differentialin relationto others. One cannotat the same timewishforasociety f equal citizens n theorynd resent ts impactwhen itcomes bout in practice a very ntellectual allacy,s S. M. Lip-setoncepointed ut when he described heyearningfAmericanadvocates fdemocracyor hequiet privilegesf Oxford olleges.There remains,finally,he taskfora new liberalism, ne ofactively hapingthe future ather handefending bstractprin-ciples of howevergeneralsignificance.The equality partyhashad itsday. In the name of citizenshipt has changedthe faceof our societies, nd indeed it will probably ontinue to do sofor ome timetocome. We shallsee moreof theparallel processofdestructuring,foverparticipation,nd offragmentationhichI havedescribed. The newmood ofsolidarity hich sbeginningto spreadmay n factbe turned o two ratherdifferenturposes.One is the bleak utopia to whichI have alluded several times:Tocqueville's democracy onesour,Mill's "tyrannyfthemajor-ity,"Weber'sprisonofa new dependence, r perhapsthe swingbackfrom nstructuredqualityto crudeand totalpower. Butthereare traces lso of a more attractivemage of the future,possibly quallyUtopianfor thetimebeing: some of thenotions



30/30

CITIZENSHIP AND BEYOND 701which Marx held about man in a societywhich was no longerprimarily roduction-nd growth-oriented. abermas's dea offree ommunication, growing earchforwaysto turn olidarityto individualpurpose. I frankly o not know what a liberalimageof the futurewould look like in detail,but I feel surethatthe timehas come for the libertyparty o enterthe stageagain withforce, nd to insistthatcitizenships not a goal initself ut a meanstoward nlarging he life chancesof men.

Documents

Citizenship and Beyond; The Social Dynamics of an Idea