Theories of citizenship

The various theories of citizenship outlined in Knight Abowitz & Harnish clearly conflict with Banks’ principles and concepts for educating citizens in a “global age”. While the two most popular discourses in the United States, Civic Republican Citizenship and Liberal Citizenship, have served their purpose in our country’s past, it seems that they are somewhat outdated, if not detrimental to our planets future. When we consider the environmental, political, and social climate of the world today, such self-centered, ethnocentric, “king of the hill” approaches to citizenship, as civil republican citizenship was described, cannot lead the earth’s populations toward progress with regard to establishing a more understanding, caring, fair and equal environment.
Although civic republican and liberal citizenship are not the only forms with origins that stem from an ancient European view on the world and what is “right”, it does seem that proponents of these approaches (although nationwide curriculums combine them) view their origins as reason to consider them credible. In the United States, a nation seen by many as a product of Europe, the ancient Greek and Roman examples of civilization have been most recognized as our models, forerunner that serve as standards with which we must compare ourselves with. A clear indication for much of the world, and many who have been seen or see themselves as second class citizens in the U.S., that the Euro-centric view of the world that the “founding fathers” agreed with still prevails and is ingrained and institutionalized in our society.
And yet, all of these approaches are inter-connected, despite coming into direct conflict quite often. The skills emphasized in the civic republican approach are valuable. Understanding civil citizenship, political citizenship, and social citizenship, and all that they entail, is extremely important for any school/organization/curriculum with a goal of implementing a critical citizenship approach. The emphasis on ones ability to reason, to build consensus, to develop complex understandings, and being empathetic and tolerant are extremely important when considering a transnational approach to citizenship and our planetary well-being.
Our world has become a smaller place. Technology links humans from all over the world. Crimes against humanity is increasingly seen as humanities' problem. More and more people are “thinking globally” and intend to “act logically”, as Banks described in his "cosmopolitan approach". The sometimes, and I would argue that in the future it will be all the time, irrational patriotism and ethnocentrism that many nations spout as rallying cries do impede democracy and undermine peace and cooperation in our world. Taking from the work of William Thompson, co-author of the Ross School curriculum, the consciousness of humanity as a whole has and will continue to evolve. As we do, the man-made boundaries of the past will serve only to divide us and contribute to the hostilities in the world. We must consciously evolve toward a better world, free of the biases or old world thinking. It is for the good of each individual and for the good of our planet to be more understanding and empathetic, to relate diplomatically, and to work toward togetherness. Sounds mushy and lovey dovey, but its true.