CITIZENSHIP AND PUBLIC SPHERE

Concept of Citizenship and Public Sphere

Citizenship and Public Sphere

Introduction

Citizenship is generally defined by the jurists as the condition of the person who belongs to the constitutive population of a state. It is a definition of all unsatisfactory. It takes only one of many aspects of citizenship, and does not take into account the fact that we are faced with one of those concepts "universal", which require a high degree of interdisciplinarity and force consideration of various points of view of various Structural and functional dimensions, varied perspectives of scientific disciplines. Citizenship as a legal status recognized by positive law to those who are considered "belonging to the state." (Lilleker, 2006, n.d). This status derive specific rights and obligations, which are recognized and required by the authority, which provides, the definition of "modes of acquisition" of citizenship through its legislation, i.e. the legal conditions according to which a person can be defined as a citizen and that is tied to the state and belongs to a particular type constraint vertical. However, the public sphere is a concept explored in some detail and described by scientists and politicians. Although the study relate primarily to the period of the birth of the bourgeois state, but most of the modern theory of the public sphere is based on a definition developed by a German philosopher. According to this definition, the public sphere is an area of human social activity in which public opinion is formed. This is an area where people can freely discuss important social issues and through this discussion to influence the actions of politicians (Esser, 2004, Pp. 64). Both of these definitions give general view to basic Human rights of every individual in one society. Both of the concepts are discussed in this study in detail and further explains that how political communication is undermining and weakening the democratic process and public sphere.

Discussion

Human rights are paramount moral rights that are recognized in international law and practice. They are not necessarily the rights that we need for survival, but they are needed for a dignified life. Liberal theorists believe that human rights are the rights that an individual has simply because he or she is human, and, therefore, should be equally held by all human beings. These include the rights to life, liberty, secure possession of property and the exercise of freedom of speech. Since being human cannot be renounced, lost, or forfeited, human rights are unconditional (Alston, 2000, Pp.12). The liberals view is that the only acceptable reason for constraining the freedom of an individual would be to protect the rights of another person. In practice, not all people enjoy their rights equally. However, this does not mean that the rights are not entitled to them. Human rights are asserted by those who feel that the rights they are entitled to are not being met, and, therefore, need to be claimed. For example, if one has food, then one is likely to enjoy food as a basic human need ...