Evaluating Union Citizenship: Belonging, Rights and Participation Within the EU by Richard Bellamy Critical Review

Introduction and Article Summary

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

In a majority of the cases, Union citizenship is seen as complementary rather than an alternative to member-state citizenship. While others have painted this in a negative light, the current article vouches for the complementary status of citizenship in the sense that it is not only normatively acceptable but also sociologically plausible. Essentially, the author notes that Union citizenship serves to enhance citizenship with a consequential achievement of more developed democratic welfare frameworks that are inclusive. Union citizenship normally features two contrasting yet completely essential potentialities or benefits. On one hand, others view Union citizenship as a potential rival of the member-states citizenship. In this respect, Union citizenship entails the enhancement of a European identity through consideration of common political ideologies and cultural subscriptions that could override the citizens national identities. This account looks to promote Union citizenship through the development of an effective relationship among the citizens which translates into their loyalty towards the European Union in a manner comparable to that of co-nationals towards the state and themselves. This will facilitate the legitimization of greater development competencies up at the European level rather than the state level. The need overlies the unwavering quest by the Parliament and the Commission to reduce the relationship gat between Europe and its citizens. On the other hand, others have sought to abandon state-level citizenship for the Union citizenship as it transcends the restrictive normative boundaries of the state-level citizenship. Bellamy notes that the Union citizenship will ratify major aspects of state-level citizenship and promote humanity in the European Union through human entitlements like freedom and unity. Regardless of the standpoint, Bellamy (2008) notes that the real tenets of the European citizenship remain disappointing as the presumptive rights are still pegged on the state-level citizenship which, tentatively, is supposed to subsume Union citizenship. The article comprehensively and wittingly deconstructs the subject through the provision of insightful, adequately and properly cited arguments. The following discussion applies Shields and Rangarjans (2013) conceptual framework to critically analyse the article.

Analysis

Formatively, Bellamy has outlined the article in three main sections, presumably for the sake of ease of internalization of the premise and arguments. The first section presents a sketch of the manner in which belonging, right, and participation, as the three primary values of citizenship, support each other within the frameworks of the various nation states. The second sections discredit the transformation of politics of belonging citing that the change has yet to reach the level of that of the nation state. In this regard, the relationship should be functions of principles of rights that are free from the influence of the respective political communities. The third and last section agrees that such independence remains a mere figment of the imagination given that rights have always been direct products of the cultural prescriptions and participations of people. Regarding the general outlay of the article, the author has taken a path that ensures the article is simple and easy to analyse. The points flow smoothly with each idea leading to the next. Even so, it is worth noting that a smooth flow of the points and arguments is not a direct stamp of approval on the validity, accuracy, and reliability of the article; the three aspects usually depend more on the content and the nature of the arguments.

In accordance with the conceptual framework, this article qualifies as an explanation given that it focuses on why (cause), despite its complementary nature, Union citizenship (the phenomenon) is still preferable to state-level citizenship. On that note, and in line with the conceptual framework, Bellamy identifies belonging, rights and participation as the primary influential factors for Union citizenship. The interlink between these three factors describes and determines the purpose of the article- highlighting the potentialities of Union citizenship amidst challenges in the achievement of the status. In normal contexts, citizenship rides on three chief values, including belonging, rights, and participation. That is, it entails being a member of a community, enjoying certain rights and privileges as humans within the community, and lastly, the entitlement and capacity to be fully involved in the affairs of the community. Even so, Bellamys definition of citizenship is vague in that it cannot be distinguished from nationality. It lacks the sovereignty aspect that definitively differentiates citizenship from nationality. While the three aspects are normatively similar in each case, nationality does not include the element of sovereignty. Nonetheless, belonging, rights and participation mutually reinforce, and, as a result, create a situation of civic equality among the citizens. As a means of evoking the thoughts of readers, Bellamy has applied rhetoric, among other styles, in the article. For instance, he wonders whether the aspect of belonging creates a European community. The aspect of European citizenship is underpinned by measures such as EU passports and anthem, aimed at promoting union identification. These measures spelt out particular rights and a level of belonging that necessitated equal participation and involvement of the citizens in the European Union, in this manner creating a European Union community.

The low levels of ethos and pathos of the article spell little persuasiveness despite the fact that Bellamy has grounded his premises with sufficient facts and citations. However, it is worth to note that the article is exemplary in its consideration of logos. It appeals to logic and presents the readers with well-grounded arguments, plenty of citations, and a format they can easily follow and relate with. The author has even used stylistic devices like rhetoric to make logical arguments on the phenomenon. The link between the arguments and the sources facilitates the ability of the reader to synthesize the presented perspectives. The author has done so little in terms of ethos (appeal to ethics). In particular, the discussion uses relatively outdated literature, some as old as Dahl (1957), which would make a reader question the authenticity and the accuracy of the claims with regards to timeliness. Just like the ethos, the article is not sufficiently grounded on pathos, that is, the points are presented plainly with almost no emotional appeal to the readers. A reader of the article, therefore, may only choose to continue analysing the article given the eloquence and coherence, but not because of any emotional attachment to the arguments.

Conclusion

The article has successfully achieved its purpose by looking at the reasons for the existence of the phenomenon (Union citizenship) and its definitive factors. It notes that while complementary, Union citizenship is attractive and would be preferable to national or state-level citizenship. Even then, given the state differences, among other challenges, achieving a complete status of Union citizenship would be uncertain. Therefore, the author fails to reach an absolute conclusion in this sense despite having a comprehensive analysis of and highlighting the most important aspects of the phenomenon.

References List

Bellamy, R 2008, Evaluating Union citizenship: belonging, rights, and participation within the EU,' Citizenship Studies, 12:6, 597-611, DOI: 10.1080/13621020802450676.

Dahl, R 1957, Decision-making in a Democracy: The Supreme Court as National Policymaker, Journal of Public Law, Vol 6, pp. 279-95.

Shields, P & Rangarjan, N 2013, A Playbook for Research Methods: Integrating Conceptual Frameworks and Project Management, New Forums Press, Stillwater, OK. p. 24.