Q) Critically analyze Aristotle’s views on citizenship.

Or
Q) Discuss the classical model of citizenship. What are the
positive and negative implications of this view?
Introduction
The concept of citizenship has a long history and its meaning has changed over time as it
has been applied to new and different circumstances. The idea and practice of
citizenship was first thoroughly explored by Greek philosophers for whom participation
in public life was crucial to the full and proper development of human personality. The
problem before these societies was how to bring social peace i.e. by giving power to a
few persons or spread it more widely. While Plato gave the idea of absolute authority to
the Guardians, Aristotle developed the idea of citizenship.

Greek Theory of Citizenship/Aristotle’s views on Citizenship

The concept of citizenship was developed by Aristotle in his book ‘Politics’. Aristotle held
the view that man is a political animal and he could reach the full potential of his life
and personality only by participation in the affairs of the polis. The population of Greek
city- states was divided into citizens, slaves, women, foreign residents. Hence the
question was who could participate and who could not. Before explaining who is a
citizen, Aristotle clarifies what citizenship is not. He said that mere residence in the polis
does not make a person citizen- aliens and slaves reside along with citizens in the same
city. Secondly, the enjoyment of legal right of suing or being sued and enjoying
protection at home does not constitute citizenship because these facilities are also
made available to the slaves.
Against all these, citizenship can be defined only in terms of functions. The functions
that make a man citizen are participation in judicial power and public offices. According
to Aristotle, citizen is he ‘who has the power to take part in the deliberative or judicial
administration of any state’. Citizenship meant not merely participation in the election
of the legislator or the executive authorities but direct or active share in the exercise of
deliberate and judicial functions in which the sovereign power resided. Citizenship
meant participation in the exercise of sovereignty.
If citizenship meant participation in the exercise of sovereign power, the big question is-
who should be allowed to exercise this power. According to Aristotle, this could be
different in different governments such as monarchy, oligarchy or democracy. But
nowhere this power is given to slaves, women and foreign residents. Aristotle also
excluded manual and menial workers from the pale of citizenship and he had solid
reasons for this. According to him participation in the deliberative and judicial functions
of the state demands a high degree of moral and intellectual excellence, which he terms
as ‘virtue’. This is not to be found in all the inhabitants of the state. The slaves are not
citizen because they do not have deliberative faculty. Women are not citizen because
they do not possess virtues worthy of a citizen. The resident aliens cannot be citizens
because they are the citizens of other city- states. The mechanics and laborers are not
citizens because they do not have the leisure necessary for a citizen. In this context
Aristotle makes an interesting distinction. According to him, human activity is of two
types. The first is the work done as a means to an end beyond itself i.e. no one does it
for its own sake, for example plough a field, stitching a garment, mining gold and silver.
These are useful but necessary functions. He calls these activities ‘necessary condition’
of the state. The other type of work is that which man engages himself because he
thinks them worth doing for their own sake and not as a means to an end, for example,
pursuit of knowledge, making verses, painting or the pursuit of higher values such as
truth, beauty or goodness. These are called ‘leisure’ activities. Such activities include
politics i.e. the activity of ruling or performance of public service. Such activities
Aristotle calls as ‘part’ of the state. Now only those who actively share or have the
leisure to share in the government are an integral part of it. All others are merely
‘necessary conditions that provide material environment within which the active citizen,
free from mental task, can function.
Explaining the virtues of a citizen, Aristotle says that the citizen should know both how
to rule and how to obey. They must possess the knowledge and the capacity requisite
for ruling as well as for being ruled. Aristotle believed in the dictum that ‘he who has
never learnt to obey cannot be a good commander. The good citizen ought to be
capable of both. He should know how to govern like a freeman and how to obey like a
freeman- these are the virtues of a citizen.
Conclusion
The modern citizenship is a legacy of 2500 years of political pressures and educational
preparations. The Greek city state of Plato and Aristotle provided a powerful emerging
force for the development and consolidation of citizenship. Hence, Aristotle’s idea of
citizenship is that of an economically independent gentlemen who has enough
experience, education and leisure to devote him to active citizenship. Another virtue of
citizen, which Aristotle emphasizes, is that all the citizens should take their turn of
governing and being governed. And last but not the least; Aristotle lay that ‘the ruling
class should be owner of property for they are citizens and the citizens of the state
should be in good circumstances.