Citizenship: Level 1 (minors protected by basic rights-as they are today) Level 2 (adulthood 18 yrs- must pass basic academics and interview - no criminal record)
Level 3 (paid taxes for 5 years, employed for 5 years, community service record, no criminal record)
Level 4 all the above and have established major contributions to humanity through their profession and community work and helping others to advance their citizenship status
[Non-citizens are not afforded the full bill of rights because they haven't earned them, but are encouraged and aided by everyone to become productive citizens in society]
Citizenship at higher levels allows for more protections, advantages and responsibilities in society. Obviously this is a rough outline - missing many details.
What do you think of the basic idea? Any additional ideas???
2006-07-06 06:18:58 · 11 answers · asked by jjttkbford 4 in Social Science ➔ Other - Social Science
The only thing missing is Level 5, the above-the-law ruling class, a member of which can seize anyone's property or take anyone's life at will.
Generally speaking, whenever you have a large number of people limited in their rights, they will be inclined to work towards (including, if necessary, fighting for) the abolition of those limitations. So anything less than universal suffrage is likely to generate completely unnecessary political tensions.
Note also that your system is seriously rigged in favor of the wealthy. Community service is very easy to do if you don't have to work for a living. Avoiding criminal record is also much easier if you are a person of considerable means (you can afford to have sex with minors in Bangkok and smoke pot in Amsterdam).
Additional (usually, not-so-good) ideas? Sure...
In the 19th century, all democracies of the world practiced property requirements (only property owners could vote). Also, women and ethnic minorities were generally prohibited from both voting and holding office.
In South Africa under apartheid, there actually was a three-level system; the Blacks had less rights than Indians, and Indians, less than Whites.
In 1930s, there was a considerable debate in the Indian independence movement as to whether or not the untouchables should be made second-class citizens upon achievement of independence. Mahatma Gandhi even went on a "fast unto death" in 1932, when the British made their Communal Award and granted separate electorates for the untouchables.
In his science-fiction novel "Starship Troopers", Robert Heinlein describes a society where full citizenship (complete with the right to vote and hold office) can only be earned one way -- through government (mostly military) service. Full citizenship could only be exercised after an honorable discharge from service (i.e., no additional rights were bestowed on active members of the service).
2006-07-06 07:18:42 · answer #1 · answered by NC 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
A "citizen" is a citizen. I don't see how making different levels helps anything. I do think that serving the nation should be a requirement though. Whether that be through mandatory 2 year military service at 18 y/o or community service. I also think that every "citizen" should be required to take and pass the same exam that people applying for citizenship have to take. It is a sad statement that most Americans born in the country don't know most of the basic history of our country.
2006-07-06 07:04:10 · answer #2 · answered by highlander 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not joking one bit, I think that is one of the best ideas I have heard in a long time.
Only change so far is that the 10 should be for everybody. But there should be benefits for people who are more responsible. Like item 4, not total amount given, but percentage of income and time. I think that an educated person who contributes to the tax system, and charitys should have a vote that counts for more then somebody who is a drain on the system.
Here here, my good man. This is great.
b
2006-07-06 06:23:49 · answer #3 · answered by Bacchus 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think to become a citizen at least one of your parents should be one. I don't believe that people just traveling illegally en masse across the border and spitting out children should be rewarded by having their children become automatic citizens - and thereby making it harder for the government to deport them because of how "morally difficult" it would be to separate parents from their children.
I think that makes it simple. If at least one parent isn't a citizen then the child isn't a citizen. It's just not that hard...
But do I think there should be "levels" of citizenship? Hell no. You've just taken people born into extreme disparities of income, social class, parental direction, etc...and tested them based on something that is much harder to accomplish when coming from poverty. Like you, that's a rough outline, but a basic picture.
2006-07-06 06:24:50 · answer #4 · answered by tagi_65 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think it is an idea that has merit...I'd like to see more details, though about what rights are earned at each stage. This information would probably answer my secondary question, which is what incentive does one have to progress thru the various levels?
What do we do with all of the people who don't care to earn citizenship? Do we deport them? How do we keep them from coming back with all the rest of the illegals?
2006-07-06 06:26:07 · answer #5 · answered by abfabmom1 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes it should be earned, because a lot of non-citezens are hardworking and have a lot to offer our country. After a total of so many years they should gain permanent citizenship.
2006-07-06 06:22:42 · answer #6 · answered by freddy_calhoun 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No, citizenship is a right for everyone born in the USA.
2006-07-06 06:22:05 · answer #7 · answered by John Luke 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Ever heard of the Constitution?
2006-07-06 06:25:51 · answer #8 · answered by Bobbie 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No comments
2006-07-06 06:24:12 · answer #9 · answered by ? 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
NO, if you were born here then you didn't have to "earn it"!
2006-07-06 06:24:09 · answer #10 · answered by leakser68 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋