Unit Two:
I could not begin this post on the Duties of Citizenship without talking about the recent controversy with Donald Trump and "The Squad," the four progressive congresswoman conglomerate of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez; Ilhan Omar; Ayanna Pressley; and Talib Kweli, (which I know this is not her name, this is a placeholder until I can find it - and I should be ashamed because I'm from Michigan and I'm SO sorry, Rashida Tlaib) and what does it mean to be a citizen of the United States? How does this translate to my role as a global citizen; an American living overseas; a Black American woman that abides not by the double-consciousness coined by DuBois but a triple-consciousness because I not only have to consider race, and nationality, but gender in my dealings as a human person born on United States soil to the descendants of slaves? What does it mean to be a global citizen? Further, what does it mean to be an American Social Studies educator that happens to teach internationally in locations where the values held dear in the Social Studies curriculum and the values intrinsic and inherent that inform American history as a whole are not held in the same esteem as in the host country.
It is one of the reasons why I watch with interest the debate between what it means to be an American in the age of Trumpism. My "race" and my American-ness are so intrinsically tied to my personality and my being that it is also tied into how I teach my course. I cannot talk about citizenry in the world without tying it to the experience of minority diasporas across the world - me specifically, the Black/African Disapora; but the Jewish Diaspora and the Chinese Diaspora for example, color the worlds in which we participate in the citizenry of our countries. For those who are saddled with a double or triple consciousness, the three principles of citizenship proffered by Westheimer and Kahne, "personally responsible, participatory, and the justice oriented citizen" are not things that can be taught singularly - they are taught as a cohesive unit. There is no politics in my American Government class, although I teach about political systems. For me, Tocqueville's observation on citizenship (again quoted in Westheimer and Kahne), "Civic participation transcends particular community problems or opportunities.... develop[ing] relationships, common understandings, trust and collective commitments." Tocqueville's assessment here leads less towards government citizenship and more towards humanity. You cannot separate one from the other.
Recently, in Michigan, Republican lawmakers resolved to change the moniker "Core Democratic Values" (small d) to "Core Values" because values shouldn't be Republican or Democrat (which is offense to Democrats anyway, its Democratic). After I rolled my eyes, I thought about exactly what he meant. While not knowing what Core Democratic Values are is a separate problem (he knows, but is being deliberately obtuse), the fact that this man's values, as ridiculous as they are, will dictate the curriculum actually provides anecdotal evidence for the theory advanced again by Westheimer and Kahne who stated in "What Kind of Citizen" that "types of narrow and ideologically conservative conception[s]... reflects not arbitrary choices but... political choices with political consequences.
Therefore, it is not difficult to see how the political, personal, and moral prerogatives of teachers guide the directions of the lessons and tone of the discourse used in the classroom. Good citizenship is more than paying lip service to the Judeo-Christian values promulgated with the personally responsible citizen, or just voting or learning about social justice. You must learn about social justice, work in your community to change it and participate in your government by being politically informed - not necessarily voting. The three are inextricably linked and cannot be untethered.
Also, I wanted to include this earlier, as it relates directly to the data provided on civic government participation, but could not figure out how to fit it into the earlier thoughts, so I will leave this here.
I live in China, where citizenship here is one of the hardest to attain in the world. It is so difficult to be a citizen here - with all of the benefits therein, because their citizenship is largely tied to their nationalism and ethnicity; one of my students believes you cannot be Chinese if you don't live here - but you can be of Chinese descent. As I typed this blog post, I was on a flight to Hong Kong, literally a current day city-state, and one that has a high degree of participatory citizenship, according to that multiple government study on civic participation. To supplement that, I was also reading an article in the SCMP (South China Morning Post) and the author was speaking about the rule of law - in China that rule of law is tethered to blind obedience to the dictates of the Chinese Communist Party - Wang Zhenmin stated that the rule of law is like "water and air," and that the city must have the "Chinese constitution as the root of their law and the Basic Law (the constitution of Hong Kong) as a supplement. Hong Kong, however, thinks the rule of law is how we view it in America and the west.
Beijing can't say so, but the people of Hong Kong are in full scale rebellion mode. Their citizenship in Hong Kong, not China, is essential to their identity. In Hong Kong, it is becoming increasingly harder for mainland Chinese to even come into the city because they view the Chinese mainlanders as invaders. They feel their democracy is under threat and its citizens recognize and understand that and despite massive resistance, will continue to stand up for their Basic Law and the rule of law. There is a protest scheduled for today; I am going to go and see what the protests are like. To be in a country that is actively fighting for its soul against a hostile foreign power is an interesting concept, and probably one that I may not get to see again in my lifetime.
It is one of the reasons why I watch with interest the debate between what it means to be an American in the age of Trumpism. My "race" and my American-ness are so intrinsically tied to my personality and my being that it is also tied into how I teach my course. I cannot talk about citizenry in the world without tying it to the experience of minority diasporas across the world - me specifically, the Black/African Disapora; but the Jewish Diaspora and the Chinese Diaspora for example, color the worlds in which we participate in the citizenry of our countries. For those who are saddled with a double or triple consciousness, the three principles of citizenship proffered by Westheimer and Kahne, "personally responsible, participatory, and the justice oriented citizen" are not things that can be taught singularly - they are taught as a cohesive unit. There is no politics in my American Government class, although I teach about political systems. For me, Tocqueville's observation on citizenship (again quoted in Westheimer and Kahne), "Civic participation transcends particular community problems or opportunities.... develop[ing] relationships, common understandings, trust and collective commitments." Tocqueville's assessment here leads less towards government citizenship and more towards humanity. You cannot separate one from the other.
Recently, in Michigan, Republican lawmakers resolved to change the moniker "Core Democratic Values" (small d) to "Core Values" because values shouldn't be Republican or Democrat (which is offense to Democrats anyway, its Democratic). After I rolled my eyes, I thought about exactly what he meant. While not knowing what Core Democratic Values are is a separate problem (he knows, but is being deliberately obtuse), the fact that this man's values, as ridiculous as they are, will dictate the curriculum actually provides anecdotal evidence for the theory advanced again by Westheimer and Kahne who stated in "What Kind of Citizen" that "types of narrow and ideologically conservative conception[s]... reflects not arbitrary choices but... political choices with political consequences.
Therefore, it is not difficult to see how the political, personal, and moral prerogatives of teachers guide the directions of the lessons and tone of the discourse used in the classroom. Good citizenship is more than paying lip service to the Judeo-Christian values promulgated with the personally responsible citizen, or just voting or learning about social justice. You must learn about social justice, work in your community to change it and participate in your government by being politically informed - not necessarily voting. The three are inextricably linked and cannot be untethered.
Also, I wanted to include this earlier, as it relates directly to the data provided on civic government participation, but could not figure out how to fit it into the earlier thoughts, so I will leave this here.
I live in China, where citizenship here is one of the hardest to attain in the world. It is so difficult to be a citizen here - with all of the benefits therein, because their citizenship is largely tied to their nationalism and ethnicity; one of my students believes you cannot be Chinese if you don't live here - but you can be of Chinese descent. As I typed this blog post, I was on a flight to Hong Kong, literally a current day city-state, and one that has a high degree of participatory citizenship, according to that multiple government study on civic participation. To supplement that, I was also reading an article in the SCMP (South China Morning Post) and the author was speaking about the rule of law - in China that rule of law is tethered to blind obedience to the dictates of the Chinese Communist Party - Wang Zhenmin stated that the rule of law is like "water and air," and that the city must have the "Chinese constitution as the root of their law and the Basic Law (the constitution of Hong Kong) as a supplement. Hong Kong, however, thinks the rule of law is how we view it in America and the west.
Beijing can't say so, but the people of Hong Kong are in full scale rebellion mode. Their citizenship in Hong Kong, not China, is essential to their identity. In Hong Kong, it is becoming increasingly harder for mainland Chinese to even come into the city because they view the Chinese mainlanders as invaders. They feel their democracy is under threat and its citizens recognize and understand that and despite massive resistance, will continue to stand up for their Basic Law and the rule of law. There is a protest scheduled for today; I am going to go and see what the protests are like. To be in a country that is actively fighting for its soul against a hostile foreign power is an interesting concept, and probably one that I may not get to see again in my lifetime.
Hi Shanna,
ReplyDeleteThanks for your work here. I'm sorry we got onto a bit of a different time frame with this, but so glad to read it and have a chance to reflect on the many interesting points you raise here!
You raise so much it's hard to know where to start. But, I guess for me, is that your primary point is that we have to find a way to untie citizenship from nationality. Well, maybe that's not your point--after all, national citizenship is still the best hope that we will have our basic human dignity protected, so to not recognize the power of the nation-state would be a mistake. That said, as you note with your reflections on triple consciousness and diaspora, a single unitary national citizenship has never been the case for many people on the globe and is increasingly not the norm. We need to foster and cultivate multiple forms of belonging, recognizing that in many cases these actually work to reinforce one another rather than work at odds.
We cannot but think of our brothers and sisters put into cages at the US border. They have fled their homeland, crossed Mexico, and now sit separated from their family. Do we best think of them as Honduran citizens who the responsibility of the Honduran state? I think not. How do we include them in our thinking without also assimilating them into our frameworks and needs? I don't necessarily have an answer to that. Cultivating our collective humanity is the end goal, but I suspect that there are lots of other intersecting selves to consider along the way. For me, it's heartening that some people are starting to rethinking their views on illegal immigration after realizing their towns were being devastated by ICE raids: https://www.thisamericanlife.org/673/left-behind/act-one-4.
Your opportunity to witness history unfold in Hong Kong is fascinating. They will have a lot to teach us. I only hope this does not come to "Chinese rule" versus "Western democracy," because I do believe the Chinese wisdom traditions have a lot to teach us about democratic modes of belonging that aren't necessarily grounded in the autonomous individual, as we tend to do in the West.
Great post!
Kyle