8. Active Citizenship in Europe

Active Citizenship in Europe. A difficult topic

Adalbert Evers, Justus-Liebig-University Giessen (Germany)

Essay

If there is a call for "active citizens" in public debates or policy documents, this mostly implies to address all kind of activities and forms of participation, reaching from good neighbourhood to party elections. Furthermore it comes along as an overall positive and normative notion - one can never have enough active citizens. However such a broad concept of active citizenship is endangered by the fact that when all kinds of activism and participation are counted in, the citizenship dimension tends to become meaningless. Therefore in political theory only those forms of active behaviour, individual and collective, by words and deeds, are meant, where the citizenship of the actors is a central and dominant dimension; they have to refer to or be touched on behalf of their identity as members of a political community and possibly as well as citizens that identify themselves with its basic values. Therefore, being active in a neighbourhood association may be a good thing, but for this kind of being active, citizenship is not the most important dimension. Not all kinds of participation, activism, solidarities etc. are active citizenship.

While this is not contentious, there is another assumption to be raised in this essay. Usually the notion of active citizenship is used with a strong normative flavour. It stands for all the good things of democratic states and civil societies: tolerance, a sense for the public good, the ability to surmount particularism a. o. But to what degree does it make sense to use active citizenship just in this way and to measure the real behaviour of people with regard to the normative ideal? Let us have a look where we are with respect to claims and contestations that refer to active citizenship in Europe.

Downturns of active citizenship

When I once asked myself, why in advertising for management "team spirit" is among the most used words, a friend mocked and said that the inflation of this label points to the lack of what is meant here in the every day life of business. Possibly the inflation of the calls for active citizenship represents the same phenomenon. There is not that much of it presently. If one speculates about the reasons, a multiplicity can be enumerated.

First of all in many countries in Europe and elsewhere people have lost their trust in politicians, political parties, central institutions or the political game at large, sometimes due to the feeling of powerlessness, sometimes as well in view of the misuse of power, of corruption and fraud. This turn to privatism is all the more problematic, since in large parts of Europe there is anyway a very liberal attitude prevailing, which does not expect much from the ordinary citizens in terms of commitments besides paying taxes, obeying the laws and voting from time to time. Active citizenship seems to be the exception of the rule, where most of us are spectators and consumers of professional politics. Representatives from the new democracies in Europe at times moan not to take the goods and rights, a liberal democracy offers, just for granted; they observe the widespread dominance of quests for negative freedom - not to be bothered and limited. Being tolerant is surely a quality of a good citizen but its not exactly active citizenship.

There are besides political cultures and what is shared and different here between European countries as well consequences of the present socioeconomic changes that affect active citizenship. Much is written about the negative effects of a social exclusion that leads to a retreat from public and political life. Images of strong warriors in the struggles for staying in the job or making a career, the delimitation of the concern with one's work but as well consumerism overshadow the claims of being as well a good and active citizen. Unlike in the US of the 50s, the "good local citizen-man" has little significance today's concepts of a satisfying "work-life balance".

Furthermore one has to face, that in many countries of Europe, like Germany, Italy, France and Spain, but as well in countries that are future newcomers to the EU, like Bulgaria, the impact of those groups is increasing, that are not given citizenship rights in the country where they live - ethnic minorities and migrants.

Finally, speaking about various aspects of downturns of active citizenship in Europe, the European Union should not be forgotten. Yes, lobbying in Brussels is not a privilege of big business; citizens´ organisations have as well their representatives there. But if one thinks in terms of active EU-citizenship or a European citizen identity (not just in terms of rights granted to EU citizens) the situation looks quite bleak to the degree there is hardly a visible link between economic unification and a political project (like it existed for some time after the second world war, when the common market was linked with the project of peace-keeping in Europe)

Active citizenship is alive - but is it all well?

The short sketch of active citizenship missing can however be counterbalanced by a reference to active citizenship remaining or revitalizing.

First of all in many European countries one can find in face of all kind of social evils a stronger rhetoric about the need for civic virtues, even for citizens duties; some even speak about signs of a new republicanism, that unlike liberal doctrines is going back to the firm conviction that institutionalised democracy is bound to fail without cultivating a strong notion of active citizenship. The upgrading of citizenship rights, activism but as well of citizenship duties may have an influence on the many forms of organized protest and interest-bargaining; the claims made there must in such an atmosphere be legitimized with an eye on the public good and the concerns and needs of all citizens. Organisations that had a strong reputation yesterday, like business corporations or trade unions have a hard time today to remake their image in order to appear as good corporate citizens.

Secondly, in many states of Europe, there is a vital sense for local citizenship, people that make foundations, volunteer, engage in culture, create alliances for local development and solidarities against urban decay and social cleavages. They often do so and volunteer explicitly with reference to their identity as citizens of their municipality, city and region. The good citizen in terms of active local co-citizenship is not dead.

Furthermore there is dialectic between developments concerning citizenship rights and active citizenship. In many countries it is the downgrading of rights, on free speech and organizing, on the public space and last not least on social citizenship rights, that is activating people as citizens concerned. Even when it may be just a special group that stands up - when it does so for defending universal rights, it speaks for the citizenship at large.

However, one can not deal with citizenship without taking account of its link with the rise of the European nation state that in most cases transformed into a democratic state; nations and democracies are not solely founded on a basic contract on rights and duties but as well on thicker grounds: a shared cultural heritage, a joint battle that took place some time ago for national independence - things that make up for a national culture and a patriotism that goes beyond the very limited notion of what Habermas was ready to accept a "patriotism of constitution" (Verfassungspatriotismus). The recent football world cup was surely not about active citizenship, but in Germany it was very much about acknowledging that a "relaxed" patriotism can be and mostly is a component of citizens´ identity and reservoir of motives to show concern and commitment.

Here it should be noted that the interplay of EC politics and national developments has as well strengthened citizenship identities. Aren't e.g. the Spanish citizens rightly proud on what their nation has achieved after Franco - with the support and as a part of the European Community? And is not a more eager but sometimes as well a more reflexive idea of ones own national interest part of the interplay between the EU and the new as well as forthcoming member states? Possibly a very far-reaching and impressive case of citizenship activated may be the recent politicisation in France in the course of the debates on the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe.

From here one can progress to the more problematic and sometimes even dark sides an activated citizenship can take. First of all this is the case when citizens get activated against a real and symbolic internal or external enemy - like the "strangers" in one's own community or the "EU bureaucracy out there" in Brussels. Patriotism turns into nationalism and the notion of what is "special" about "us" among others into an exclusive type of citizen- and member-ship to be defended and closed against "them". These not so welcomed elements however represent as well "active citizenship". And that holds true as well for those active forms of claiming membership, and the difference it makes against others, as they can be found in the active claims and demonstrations against giving more rights and resources to non-members. Activating the claim for the basic rights and the protection guaranteed exclusively to the members of a state-nation is often the last resort of those, who have (e.g. by long term unemployment and social exclusion) get stripped of their other identities: as respected members of a local community or workers. Therefore, they claim actively their citizenship and membership rights to the degree that this gives them a status and makes a difference towards "the others". Yes indeed, here active citizenship goes along not only with despair but as well with xenophobia, the mobilisation of prejudices and aggressive nationalism and even racism. For this notion of citizenship the values of a democratic constitution count far less compared to claimed vision of a state-framed "national culture".

Being active and committed - but not just as a citizen

At this point it is important to remember the fact, that overcoming privatism and indifference is very often not linked with active citizenship in the first place but with other facets of peoples´ identities: their role as members of a neighbourhood, religious or otherwise thick-founded community, by class solidarity or by special social and cultural concerns, where one speaks out and acts as consumer, environmentalist, feminist. Much of what has been debated for decades as social movements have and have had a (mostly overlooked) citizenship dimension but it is not active citizenship in the first line. Recently the social capital debate has made us remember that there is much more that keeps a society and political community together than just the solidarity of active citizens.

These forms of being active and participating, while not representing "active citizenship", may yet have a link and intermingle with a more or less important dose of citizenship. There are however other forms of raising one's voice and acting in public that are out of touch or even in a negative relation to the citizenship identity.

Being active, claiming rights, while being out of touch with citizenship is a well known fact, that marks all the usual active forms of particularism or corporatism to be found in European countries. Special groups defend special interests or claim special benefits without caring much what this means for other groups, whose members should be seen as well as co-citizens concerned in one or the other way. It has already been pointed out, that both big business and big labour can have such attitudes; but localism and single issue-mentality are to be found as well among new social movements.

After all, one should remember that throughout Europe, regionalism and regionalist movements are quite often much more than a romantic affair. And finally, even for the most liberal and plural society, the "break even point" may be reached where the loyalty to a specific group - a subculture, an ethnic community is put above one's loyalty and identity as a member of a democratic nation of citizens.

They don't come easy. Activism, citizenship and their links

All in all, in this essay it has been argued for a more analytical and restricted notion of active citizenship compared to the strongly positive/normative concept and the catch-all attitude to be found in public discourses, but as well, I think, in the theoretical debates.

What does it mean in a normative perspective that is concerned with strengthening "good citizenship" within the wide area of forms of active citizenship and active claims of groups, communities and interest organisations? Perhaps, some of the secrets of good citizenship lie in giving substance to it and in the linkages, checks and balances with other identities, people refer to when they get active, participate, volunteer or make claims.

Giving more substance to citizenship touches on the many forms one refers to it in public discourses and controversies - or not. Is it just about a collection of written citizenship rights to be claimed? Perhaps there is more to it with a view on a shared history and an idea of what all citizens want to share with an eye on the future. To what degree does the reading of the past and the prospects for the future touch on a substantial, democratic and civic concept of an active citizen? In Germany at least, citizenship and its democratic and civil dimensions get presently a hot topic. In the discourse with representatives of migrant communities, now organized and institutionalized officially by the government, the question is constantly there, how to define the common values and rights to be shared, the "centering and orienting culture" (Leitkultur) towards everyone - natives and migrants - should orientate.

Secondly, the link between specific economic, social and cultural concerns that activate people and their concerns as citizens is a critical issue.

On the one hand the appeal to citizens and what they share gets empty or even turns into a dangerous nationalism if it ignores peoples´ problems as workers, mothers, local citizens etc. In some member states of the EU, it is meant to offer a point of identification and unification that makes people forget exactly about the other dimensions of their life - strong national rhetoric in order to hold down massive social problems.

On the other hand, the many voices of claims, concerns and projects in liberal societies tend to transform all too easily into all sorts of corporatism and particularism in case there is not a solid common sense of what is fair and right in a citizenship. A sense of citizenship is not only important in order to be able to think about limiting ones´ claims but as well in order to make them count. Therefore there is a need to achieving a degree of being "other-regarding" across the diversity of groups in the political community.

And the European Community? Against the background sketched here it seems pretentious to claim that the development of an active European citizenship could substitute for a loss of "good citizenship" in its respective nation-state-environments. A better political culture, including more European-wide "good citizenship" will have to build on what is happening in the member states. This as well leaves a role for the EU concerning its policy style at large and special initiatives to be taken. Because one thing is certain: the relation between active citizenship in national and international / European contexts is not a zero-sum game.