I remember seeing in an old film of the French revolution how in the post revolution ‘State’ which had emerged as a Republic after the abolition of the monarchy, the people addressing each other as ‘Citizen’ in the manner that was like the communist ‘Comrade’. A term that equalized the populace within an idea of commonality, by virtue of a new ideological landscape being set into the country, that that they inhabited, but wanted transformed in to something newer, and presumably better. Taking to account the ‘developments’ or if one may say the ‘dynamics’ that were seen in the Sri Lankan political landscape I wondered what it is to be ‘a citizen’? My contemplations made me to arrive at a very simple single liner. I made a ‘tweet’ of it on Twitter as my airing of it. But I thought there was more to discuss on that that a micro blogging of 140 characters would permit. In my opinion I believe Citizenship is being a stakeholder of the state that you are a member of, be it through default or design. The state which you too have helped shape through your ballot casting (or boycotting it), through your contributions (or lack of it by slacking off) to the economy, in which you would feel the effects of price hikes, and business booms.
The idea of ‘State’ precedes conceptions of ‘Nationhood’ and in fact can be very rightly argued as the inception of man’s long hard trek towards ‘civilization’. Man has lived in the institution called the State far before seeing himself as part of a Nation. I supposed it would be correct to suggest that the idea of being a Nation would occur to a people when they encountered a group different to their own ways and systems of being governed. If “Man by nature is a political animal” as said by Aristotle, then going by that one may say that Government existed before race or ethnicity. Man has always been a creature who crafted (the) State. Yet today one is made to wonder how many inadvertent members, (compelled to be part of directing the motion of the State they live in) truly understand what it is to be a citizen. Most significantly the question would come in when looking at the constitutional form of our State: Republic.
How many of us truly ever thought about what it means to be a citizen? What does it mean to cast your ballot, to exercise franchise? Is it a ‘right’? Or is it something more, like a ‘duty’? A right would mean the one who holds it has the discretion of whether or not to exercise it, whereas a duty would be more compelling and not that easily escapable. In our country the prerogative a citizen holds to be a stake holder of his State can be easily priced as I once came to learn. 500/- LKR became the standard rate for which one could sell his polling card some time back in a local government election of the Colombo district. And in countries like Australia the result for failure to cast your vote is a fine of $50. Who is the more privileged citizen in this scenario? The Australian who has not the right to chose what he may do with his right of franchise? Or the Lankan who may decide at his personal discretion what may be done with his polling card? After all there’s no small print I’ve ever noticed on a polling card that says “Not transferable”. And isn’t the Lankan exercising his ‘right’ to do what he so wishes with his personal polling card as an individual of a Republic, where the sovereignty is vested in the people?...Unlike in Australia with it’s barely 200++ years of history, being still a Dominion of Britain, and technically not having a sovereign citizenry.
So it’s only constitutional that the Lankan should enjoy more individual liberties in a State that is a Republic, unlike in a Dominion like Australia? I’m sure some semblance of sense can be argued out of it through dexterous wordsmithing if a late night TV debate were to be setup on this topic. But the matter remains in my opinion, not as a matter to do with the individual’s ‘right’ as a citizen, but his ‘duty’ as a stakeholder of State. Sri Lanka has many lessons to learn as a citizenship that is said to get what they deserve. A fundamental is to ask yourself what it means to be a citizen of this constitutional Republic.
The idea of ‘State’ precedes conceptions of ‘Nationhood’ and in fact can be very rightly argued as the inception of man’s long hard trek towards ‘civilization’. Man has lived in the institution called the State far before seeing himself as part of a Nation. I supposed it would be correct to suggest that the idea of being a Nation would occur to a people when they encountered a group different to their own ways and systems of being governed. If “Man by nature is a political animal” as said by Aristotle, then going by that one may say that Government existed before race or ethnicity. Man has always been a creature who crafted (the) State. Yet today one is made to wonder how many inadvertent members, (compelled to be part of directing the motion of the State they live in) truly understand what it is to be a citizen. Most significantly the question would come in when looking at the constitutional form of our State: Republic.
How many of us truly ever thought about what it means to be a citizen? What does it mean to cast your ballot, to exercise franchise? Is it a ‘right’? Or is it something more, like a ‘duty’? A right would mean the one who holds it has the discretion of whether or not to exercise it, whereas a duty would be more compelling and not that easily escapable. In our country the prerogative a citizen holds to be a stake holder of his State can be easily priced as I once came to learn. 500/- LKR became the standard rate for which one could sell his polling card some time back in a local government election of the Colombo district. And in countries like Australia the result for failure to cast your vote is a fine of $50. Who is the more privileged citizen in this scenario? The Australian who has not the right to chose what he may do with his right of franchise? Or the Lankan who may decide at his personal discretion what may be done with his polling card? After all there’s no small print I’ve ever noticed on a polling card that says “Not transferable”. And isn’t the Lankan exercising his ‘right’ to do what he so wishes with his personal polling card as an individual of a Republic, where the sovereignty is vested in the people?...Unlike in Australia with it’s barely 200++ years of history, being still a Dominion of Britain, and technically not having a sovereign citizenry.
So it’s only constitutional that the Lankan should enjoy more individual liberties in a State that is a Republic, unlike in a Dominion like Australia? I’m sure some semblance of sense can be argued out of it through dexterous wordsmithing if a late night TV debate were to be setup on this topic. But the matter remains in my opinion, not as a matter to do with the individual’s ‘right’ as a citizen, but his ‘duty’ as a stakeholder of State. Sri Lanka has many lessons to learn as a citizenship that is said to get what they deserve. A fundamental is to ask yourself what it means to be a citizen of this constitutional Republic.
No comments:
Post a Comment