Skip to main content

Does the "citizen" belong to a class?

The idea of being a citizen is beautifully simple. You are defined exactly like other citizens: Native registered or naturalized members of a state, nation or other political community (Collins English Dictionary, 1994).

Recently, from conversations with activist friends, thinker friends, teacher friends, corporate friends, versatile friends and friends in general, I have begun to rethink class differentiations in Tanzania.

And each time I have thought about it, I end up confused about the assumed roles each of the classes play. Of course, their roles can be specified by the modes of production they interact with, but in Tanzania the gap between the person who benefits most from modes of production and the person who benefits least is extremely large (and larger in other countries). So I end up more frustrated at the gap and the status quo than keen to wake up tomorrow and get to work.

Not that bring frustrated at the status quo and being keen to work are necessarily mutually exclusive. But the motive to do something counts; in the former it takes longer to get up and go somewhere to pick up something to do something with, while in the latter there is a plan of action and it is anticipated, that is, it is waiting to happen.

So when I think of class differentiations in my country, I grow more frustrated than I can make a plan of action.

But when I think of myself as a citizen, the class differentiations disappear, and I am - just like everyone else around me - a registered member of the state.

From the outset, being a citizen doesn't seem to prescribe a responsibility. But a few seconds of thought will yield a question: Being a member implies there are non-members, that is, non-citizens, so doesn't that also mean that there are certain things a citizen does which makes them a citizen, and there are certain things which non-citizens do which make them non-citizens?

We need not look further than that. There are things citizens do that make them citizens in relation to one another. I will save the contemplation of what these things citizens do are for another post, but again, we need not look further than that when thinking of the definition of a citizen relative to the frustration of class struggles.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tanzania is not Tasmania

Dear friends: Please let's stop refering to Tanzania as Tasmania. Here is why. Tanzania is located on the coast of East Africa, below Kenya. It is not origin of the the cartoon character from your childhood. Tasmania is an island which is part of Australia. The animal known to exist only on Tasmania is the Tasmanian Devil. Once again, you will see this is not the cartoon character you remember from your childhood. Let's summarize: Tanzania is not Tasmania.
Post a Comment
Read more

Policy Brief 2: Why is Tanzania Poor?

(Policy Brief # 2 Submitted December 6th 2007, for Econ 346 - Economic Development, Lafayette College) Over the course of the 20th century, Tanzania experienced a multitude of social, political and economic changes. It still remains poor today. The WorldBank classifies a ‘low income country’ – such as Tanzania – as one with a Gross National Income per capita of $905 or less (WorldBank Data 2006). As of 1992, Tanzania ’s per capita income was recorded at $110, and average per capita consumption was $0.5 per day (OECD 2000). Several possible factors have been blamed for contributing to current hardships, such as Julius Nyerere’s failed attempts to collectivize agriculture between 1961 and 1975 through his socialist Ujamaa policies as the first president of Tanzania (Pratt 1980). While pre-independence plans “focused on the commercialization of agriculture and the creation of industries that could reduce the need for a variety of imports”, post-independence interventions by the Gov...
4 comments
Read more

Revision rinsed II

When discussing communication for development, we tend to argue against the models based only on diffusion of media technologies. That is, in pursuing a critical approach to development practices, we tend to support participatory approaches to technology use and engagement. Yet, we leave development practice in the abstract. We stop short at revised theory, and consult with practice initiators who attempt to materialize the abstract. Even there, we treat attempts as cases, and recriticize to align with still revised theory. It's time the field of communication for development confessed its efforts to change market-based activities. It's also time that it confessed that power in the market is strong, and at most times, stronger than the power of discourse. Instead, the field of communication for development should hold strong to the assumptions that structuralist development practice has not worked. That's that. Why go further to assume that a new theory is needed, or...
Post a Comment
Read more