Citizenship And Community

It is said that the notion of ‘citizenship’ is inextricably linked to community. Discuss.

‘‘Citizenship is a status bestowed on all those who are full members of a community. All those who possess the state are equal with respect to the rights and duties within which the status in endowed. There is no universal principle that determines what those rights and duties shall be, but societies in which citizenship is a developing institution create an image of ideal citizenship against which achievement can be measured and towards which aspiration can be measured.’’ Marshall (1950, p.29)

This definition of citizenship is considered, by Lawy and Biesta (2006), to have influenced the current discourse of citizenship at policy level. The articulation of citizenship, by New Labour, into official policy and practice has produced a package of rights and responsibilities which are underpinned by communitarian philosophy. As well as focussing on the development of community to enhance citizenship, this approach presumes that all communities can be activated through initiatives. Communities cultivate different citizens, so what kind of community best develops citizenship? For New Labour the answer lies in the political community yet, as will be argued, to become a member one must be an active citizen who exercises rights and fulfils responsibilities.

For Delanty (2003), the concept of community is ‘‘…associated with a sense of belonging.’’ Therefore, the social and psychological processes, referred to by authors

Alison Williams BA (Hons) Early Childhood Studies Year 6

1

(Cohen, 1985; Howarth, 2001 and Crow and Allen, 2003), that bond groups of people together are pertinent to this reading. It is this bonding which creates the type of citizenship within a community, illustrating the immense test of New Labour’s Communitarian philosophy. The challenge is to create and encourage a set of shared values, in a vast array of communities, with the hope that this will lead to a homogeneous sense of citizenship capable of overriding any sense of belonging found outside the political community.

This reading explains how New Labour has created an image of ideal citizenry based on active, yet conforming participants who are engaged with the political processes that underpin their rights, and who readily fulfil their responsibilities which validate these rights. The impact of community on self identity and individual sense of reality is highlighted by Howarth’s (2001) socio-psychology perspective clearly showing the inseparable connection between citizenship and community. The processes which form different, and often conflicting, communities are revealed through Cohen’s (1985) symbolic community. The running theme of shared values aptly illustrates how the state is compelled to take an active role in bringing about social integration. However it is demonstrated that such tactics, unfortunately, result in the moral overtones which blight communitarian’s philosophy. New Labour’s family policy exemplifies this paradox with Gillies (2006a) and Gerwirtz (2001) showing how support for parents is offered in accordance with Governmental ideals of parenting, yet in terms of inequality is not a fair contract. In addition to this, Putman’s (2002) concept of social capital and its various forms are related to ethnic minority communities and shown to lean towards a

Alison Williams BA (Hons) Early Childhood Studies Year 6

2

model that best suits social integration. The reality of this approach is questioned. Finally a consideration of citizenship education in schools reveals how this too is embroiled with Government ideology which is preoccupied with cultivating an ideal citizenry.

According to Orton (2004) the language of citizenship lies at the heart of New Labour’s project, with responsibility of central importance. Clarke (2005) argues that this political framework starts with clear assumptions about what it means to be a citizen and about what one needs to do to achieve this status. Various authors (Clarke, 2005; Crinson, 2005 and Deacon, 2003) agree that responsible, empowered choice making citizens are desirable in Governmental terms. While this represents the vertical relationship between individual behaviour and Government ideology, community is also clearly cited as a key mechanism for social cohesion (Lister, 2007). This is explained, by Delanty (2003), who refers to Governmental communitarianism which understands community to be in conflict with society. There is, therefore, a strong political interest in the horizontal issue concerning the formation of communities and subsequent links between them.

Howarth’s (2001, p.224) social psychology of community illustrates the inextricable link between citizenship and community by recognising the ‘‘…impossibility if the lone individual.’’ From this perspective community plays an inseparable role in shaping the thoughts and actions of individual citizens. Similar to Bourdieu’s (1990) concept of habitus, which fuses social experiences with individual behaviour, Howarth (2001,

Alison Williams BA (Hons) Early Childhood Studies Year 6

3

p.225) focuses on how community contributes to forming an individual’s identity stipulating that the process ‘‘…cannot occur in isolation.’’ This view highlights the significance of community to lifestyle practices and affirmation of self. What kind of community cultivates what New Labour perceives as good citizenship is interesting to consider.

While Howarth (2001) depicts an inevitable link between self and community, Cohen (1985) offers insight into how communities are actually formed. For Cohen (1985-cited in Delanty, 2003, p.46) community is based on the symbolic construction of boundaries between groups of people. This perspective is based on the formation of community through a shared sense of reality which unites people together. The symbolic component refers to the rituals and cultural practice common to these groups. When bonds are formed in this way a community is the result, the power of which is expressed by Crow and Allen (2003, p. 184):

‘‘One of the dominant meanings of the concept of community is that those who are members of it, those who belong to it, have something in common which marks them off from outsiders who do not belong and/or are not allowed to belong.’’

Just as Howarth’s (2001) socio-psychology of community contributes to a sense of identity for the individual, Cohen’s (1985) symbolic conception of community differentiates one community from another. Within both these perspectives, and clearly

Alison Williams BA (Hons) Early Childhood Studies Year 6

4

shown by Crow and Allen (2003), there is an underlying theme of belonging as people make sense of the world around them. The picture emerging from this is a society consisting of differentiated groups each of which find common ground in their practices and awareness of themselves in relation to other groups in society. It is this phenomenon that results in conflict both between communities and communities and society. So how does current political philosophy fit into this complex picture? New Labour’s emphasis on shared values is the strategy which underpins the aspiration to create a political community based on homogeneous citizenship.

At the outset, Marshall’s (1950, p.29) definition of citizenship referred to ‘…an ideal image of citizenship’’ being created in society. It appears that New Labour’s policies are closely associated with this process. For instance, authors Cheong et al. (2007) and Faulks (2000) argue that by focussing on disadvantaged and minority communities the Government conveys a superior moral overtone which implies that certain communities must be targeted for the good of society as a whole. While Etzioni (1995) agrees with this approach, its viability amidst modernity is questionable. Accordingly, this reading notices the problems associated with Britain’s aspiration to become a ‘‘…community of communities’’ (Cheong et al. 2007, p.26). New Labour’s vision of social cohesion represents this challenge which is thought achievable through shared values. Rather than sharing this vision of unity, Katz (2004) perceives social cohesion as a Governmental attempt to impose its own idealistic values as a means of socially engineering individuals into a national community.

Alison Williams BA (Hons) Early Childhood Studies Year 6

5

According to Banks and Orton (2005) politicians perceive community to be the cure for all social ills such as crime, social exclusion, single parenting and racism. Strategies designed to alleviate these problems can be found in the Government papers Community Cohesion (2001) and Promoting Effective Citizenship and Community Empowerment (2006). Within these papers it is envisaged that public, private and voluntary sectors will work in partnership to provide communities with a voice, thus resulting in responsive policy making. It is this means of participation which is thought integral to developing active citizenry (Faulk, 2000). While this holds the promise for a bottom up solution to community problems, through tailored and responsive services, what happens when the voice of community is at odds with the values of the ideology seeking to rectify them? Clarke (2005, p.450) shares his attitude of scepticism regarding the approach, stating that participatory mechanisms are ‘‘…often tokenistic.’’ These documents also inadvertently act to strengthen existing boundaries between communities rather than unite a sense of shared values. Attention is drawn to diversity and the incompetent citizenship of particular groups is accentuated. At the same time the desirable practices of dominant groups are re-affirmed as the acceptable norm. An example of this can be found in New Labour’s family policy where the family is viewed as a building block for sustainable communities.

New Labour has given a high priority to parenting in its social exclusion agenda and, according to Henricson (2003), clearly considers the promotion of good parenting as a significant tool in fostering social cohesion. Effective parenting is seen to transmit appropriate values to children acting to protect and reproduce the common good

Alison Williams BA (Hons) Early Childhood Studies Year 6

6

(Gillies, 2006a). All parents must act on the opportunities created through policy support such as Sure Start (1999) despite their material and social realities. Gewirtz (2001, p.365) is highly critical of this suggesting that it is:

‘‘An over ambitious attempt at re-socialization with the intention being to tackle social problems of disadvantage by inculcating middle class values.’’

Those parents who deviate from, what the Government considerers as, acceptable moral choices made by more privileged communities, require regulation (Benjamin, 2006). If necessary, punitive measures such as withdrawal of state benefits will be applied. The danger of this approach is aptly highlighted by Gillies, (2006b) who expresses concerns about the material poverty of disadvantaged families being re-framed in terms of disconnection from mainstream values. Ironically the same family policy which seeks to enable effective parenting actively highlights the cultural differences which contribute to a deficit portrayal of certain families within disadvantaged communities, further entrenching this perception at societal level. To what extent the communitarian principles of New Labour can activate and empower such citizens is questionable. Contrasting ideal images of citizenship with other less favourable ones found in particular communities is unlikely to raise the agency of those most in need.

Social capital is a notion which is associated with social cohesion. New Labour’s interest the concept is described by Edwards et al. (2003) as a problem centred

Alison Williams BA (Hons) Early Childhood Studies Year 6

7

approach to raising the agency of the less privileged in society. The notion is conceptualised by the Home Office (1998) as:

‘‘The values that people have and the resources they can access, which both result in, and are a result of, collective and socially negotiated ties and relationships.’’

Social capital has become a key concept underpinning much of the Governments policy making and is seen as a way forward to dealing with difficult current social issues such as alienated communities and decreasing political engagement (Thompson, 2002). Authors Bridgen, (2006) and Edwards et al. (2003) refer to different types of social capital and Cheong et al. (2007), in particular, to its use with immigrant groups. Putman (2002) explains the difference between bridging social capital and bonding social capital stating that bridging capital overcomes existing barriers between groups, with the desire to be cohesive exceeding problems set in place by diversity or inequality. Bonding social capital on the other hand refers to the strengthening of groups on the basis of shared identities which are exclusive and do not travel beyond the community in question. According to Cheong et al. (2007, p.29) the former of these is considered, by New Labour, to be more valuable for social inclusion as it concerns:

‘‘…voluntary associations and horizontal ties based on common interests that transcend heterogeneous differences of ethnicity, religion and socioeconomic status.’’

Alison Williams BA (Hons) Early Childhood Studies Year 6

8

Such leaning towards a particular model of social capital displays how Governmental ideology pre-determines how certain cohorts must function in society to fit in with the model of citizenship. There is an underlying sense that a set of universally accepted norms must override any contrasting set of values. This was displayed in a recent speech made by Jack Straw (2007) which directly related to increasing segregation along the lines of ethnic identity. Straw (2007-cited in The Guardian, 2007, p.30) stipulated that ethnic minorities:

‘‘…must subscribe to the core democratic values of freedom, fairness, tolerance and plurality that define what it means to be British.’’

Expecting ethnic minorities to adhere to these values becomes problematic when statistics from Rai (2007) show that 60% of Bangladeshis and 40% of Pakistanis are in poverty as against 10% of white British. Clearly ethnic inequality is still virulent in British society. This contradicts the very values cited by Straw (2007-cited in The Guardian, 2007, p.30) and can only contribute to a perceived sense of injustice among ethnic minority groups which is likely to strengthen the bonds that hold them together. While, Glimmers of a utopian conception of community emerge from the bridging notion of social capital, is it really realistic to expect Britain’s diverse population, amidst the vast inequalities present in society, to find common ground? It is much more likely that bonding will prevail as the dominant form of capital with similarities and shared experiences linking individuals and groups. As Crace (2007, p.14) reiterates:

Alison Williams BA (Hons) Early Childhood Studies Year 6

9

‘‘It often much easier to define yourself by the tangible things that differentiate you from others than by the more abstract values that unite.’’

Prospects of a cohesive society diminish as communities formed from bonding social capital remain unreceptive to the Government’s broader ideal of common values. Those who cannot or will not comply with these values deny their access to the political community.

New Labour’s communitarianism synthesises with Etzioni’s (1995) promotion of community in which choice making, self directed citizens can be cultivated through the family and school institutions. Having already considered the role of the family earlier in this reading, the school based citizenship curriculum substantiates this link. Various authors (Clarke, 2005; Crinson, 2003, and Deacon, 2003) have already argued that New Labour’s communitarian approach is based on set ideas about what it means to be an active citizen. This is also reflected, according to Lawy and Biesta (2006), in educational policy from which citizenship lessons are delivered. Critically, the way in which citizenship is defined ideologically by the Government will affect the form and effectiveness of citizenship education in schools.

Authors Faulk (2006) and Oulton et al. (2004) refer to the Crick Report (1998) recommendations

from

which

led

to

the

non

statutory

guidelines

for

citizenship/personal, social and health education at key stages 1-2 and to the statutory

Alison Williams BA (Hons) Early Childhood Studies Year 6

10

arrangements for key stages 3-4. Crick (2000, p.24) affirms that citizenship education will empower young people to participate effectively in society as ‘‘…active, informed, critical and responsible citizens.’’ This conceptualises young people’s citizenship as outcome based and denies their existence as citizens prior to traversing a particular developmental and educational trajectory. When this is set against inequalities present in society, which act as barriers to both of these, it is clear that not all children will have the same opportunities to become citizens. In light of this, Faulk (2006, p.123) heavily criticises the Crick Report (1998) due to its ‘‘… sociological naivety.’’ The predominant emphasis in educational documents and reports concerning citizenship education such is its feasibility in an already over crowded curriculum. Surely a more pertinent issue to examine is the equality of the subject. Wider social and cultural experiences of young people impact on their life chances and can either enhance or diminish their attitude to learning.

Young people’s learning is not necessarily associated with a positive experience (Rudduck and Flutter, 2004). Inevitably this impacts on their receptivity to citizenship lessons. The presence of citizenship education stems from a sense that young people have become alienated from the democratic process (Lawy and Biesta, 2006). To what extent presenting opportunities for them to re-engage through a curriculum, which is over embroiled in governmental ideology and preoccupied with creating good and contributing citizens, is highly questionable. It seems the school institution faces the key challenge of how to impart, to children, the core democratic values that pave their

Alison Williams BA (Hons) Early Childhood Studies Year 6

11

way to full citizenship, and the potential for both teachers and children to be held accountable when delivery fails is uncomfortably close.

This reading has addressed the way in which citizenship has been conceptualised by New Labour. The influence of Marshall’s (1950, p.29) notion of

‘‘…an ideal citizenship against which achievements can be measured and towards which aspirations can be directed.’’

has been shown to resonate throughout the Governments approach to maintain social order. This neglects the possibility of a differentiated citizenship and leaves marginalized groups and those perceived as outsiders with the only option of complying with a normative model of citizenship. The logic behind this approach has been found in communitarian philosophy which, rather unrealistically, rests on the premise that all communities already possess or can be provided with collective agency. The link between citizenship and community is a key motivator of targeted initiatives, such as Sure Start (1999), which aim to improve choices and experiences within communities. The shortcomings of this have been shown in both New Labour’s family policy and strategies designed to increase community participation. Firstly, the former expects all parents to adhere to a concrete ideal of parenting. Their adverse material circumstances are responded to by opportunities which enable their access to practices held by desirable middle class citizens. If these opportunities are not taken such parents are condemned and perceived to be at odds with the greater good. Secondly, the later

Alison Williams BA (Hons) Early Childhood Studies Year 6

12

suggests that there is a poor connection between policy making aiming to support communities and the way in which this support is both delivered and received. Clarke’s (2005) reference to tokenism suggests that little success can be awarded to policy makers actually permeating the very fabric and culture of the communities they target. Failure to understand the lived experiences of any community appears inconsistent with the wider policy aim to create a shared sense of citizenship. The bonds which tie communities together are strong and not easily infiltrated by unfamiliar practices. Initiatives which aim to do so often result in enhancing existing bonds by highlighting, yet failing to properly address, the issues which unite them.

The communitarian approach to strengthen particular communities through increasing their social capital appears to be conditional. Reference by Cheong et al. (2007) to bridging capital illustrates how reducing conflict between communities is most desirable at policy level. Conclusively, communities must be strengthened only in a way which contributes to social cohesion. Recognising the positions individuals occupy in society, in relation to their socio-economic status and ethnicity is important in this debate as has been aptly highlighted by statistics from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (2007). Once again the ironic potential for Government ideals to alienate particular communities, and aggravate existing conflicts, is apparent. Expecting marginalised groups to subscribe to core democratic values which encompass fairness is unreasonable given inequalities that continue to reside in British society.

Alison Williams BA (Hons) Early Childhood Studies Year 6

13

Finally, citizenship education in schools is left the difficult task of empowering young people to participate in society as desirable citizens. This depicts children not as citizens but as future citizens which require careful cultivation through the school institution. Pertinently, if citizenship education fails to produce the right type of citizens, does this represent an institutional failure or an individual one? While the Government has a clear understanding of the core democratic values which guarantee entrance to full citizenship the schools task of imparting them amidst the wider cultural and social experiences of children is unenviable.

The awkward persistence of material and ethnic inequalities irrefutably continues to shape the behaviour, identity and sense of belonging among diverse communities. While citizenship and community is clearly linked at governmental level, the continuing preoccupation with developing the kind of communities which best promote an active, and idealised, citizenship is detrimental to the wider vision of social cohesion. With social order highly prioritised, it appears that a differentiated citizenship is a risk too far for New Labour.

Alison Williams BA (Hons) Early Childhood Studies Year 6

14

Alison Williams BA (Hons) Early Childhood Studies Year 6

15