Citizenship is an ongoing discussion about the rights and responsibilities concerning the individual and his relationship with the communities in which he lives, which is often discussed in our contemporary society . I will examine the three “competing visions” (Alcock, P., May, M., & Wright, S. 2016) of citizenship, then elaborate on the implications that the different perspectives pose regarding citizenship and social policy. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay The first view of citizenship concerns the relationship between an individual and the communities in which he or she resides. The second vision on citizenship, in addition to recognizing the importance of rights, underlines that citizens are "also bearers of certain responsibilities" (Alcock, May, Wright, 2016). However, the third view of citizenship states that by validating membership in a community, it allows citizenship to be scrutinized, due to the questions it raises regarding inclusion and exclusion. In this regard, citizenship-related exclusion includes both internal and external dimensions. The internal dimensions of inclusion concern how aspects of individual differences (such as gender, ethnicity and disability) are expressed, in ways that may prevent individuals (as citizens) from accessing their full rights. Exclusion, however, concerns those individuals outside of neighboring communities who are refused citizenship status. However, it can be argued that in our neoliberal society, a legal prerequisite of citizenship invokes a passport that claims an individual's right to the nation-state. Rather than on the emphasis placed on the individual's contribution to the political and social life of his community. When talking about issues relating to citizenship it is important to note the political philosophy to which it is attributed. I will examine the communitarian and liberal views of citizenship, where opposing views regarding the importance of an individual and community will be highlighted. Contemporary communitarianism as a perspective on citizenship and politics emphasizes the importance of community. Key aspects of community citizenship focus on the development of shared values ​​and collective commitment that enhance social solidarity (Durkheim 1893). Plant (1998) argues that community citizenship implies that citizenship status can only be achieved through participation in and devotion to broader community responsibilities. This suggests that citizenship is seen as a practice, where it is achieved through active engagement in social and political participation. While liberalism is affirmed with full individual rights and “freedom” from state interference, for all citizens. Citizenship is seen as a legal status that entitles all individuals to unconditional rights and entitlements. This approach to citizenship guarantees a universal passage of freedom that all individuals can enjoy, compared to communitarian views as they argue that the privileges of citizenship should be reserved only for "native and responsible citizens". Drawing on early communitarianism, new communitarians like Etzioni have played a critical role in influencing governments to introduce a narrower but contingent approach to citizenship. This would require access to basic public social assistance rights which would become available only to citizens who meet the requirements; complying with obligatory duties and responsibilities and exhibiting “agency behavior” (Alcock, May, Wright, 2016). As explained above, the new approachCommunitarian citizenship differs from early communitarianism in that it incorporates a bound legal system in which conditions must be agreed upon, before receiving the benefits of a citizen. It should be noted that both approaches to citizenship may still have marginalized groups. who could not actively participate in the social or political aspects of their community due to internal exclusions. Feminists argue that a great example of this is women. As in these eras of changing social theories, women were not granted access to the social aspects of their community nor were they granted political rights until the 20th century. However, none of the approaches discussed so far address issues related to gender, ethnicity and disability. Although the liberal perspective induced freedom from state intervention, promoting rights and prerogatives for all individuals, minority groups were not taken into consideration. Perhaps suggesting that social policies regarding citizenship were in favor of the majority of white, able-bodied middle-class individuals, as they possessed the capital and cultural means to take part in social and political affairs. Feminist critiques of citizenship and social policy reveal how citizenship before the 19th century was seen as “quintessentially masculine” (Lister, 2012). She claims women were excluded and denied citizenship due to a lack of rights they were not entitled to. Historically, men have always been granted and inherited social and political freedom, compared to women. Lister (2012) reveals how citizenship as a theory and practice in previous societies was an inclusive and exclusionary force against women. Much of this was due to the public-private dichotomy as the position of males in the public sector displayed the essential qualities of a rational, independent and political citizen. While women in the public sphere were unable to represent the desired qualities of being a citizen. It was not until 1918 that women over the age of 30 were first granted the right to vote in the United Kingdom. Pateman (1989) noted how women were often marginalized from becoming active citizens due to their limited roles in the private sphere. Where their roles and duties were governed by social norms and misogynistic ideology, thus being perceived as incapable of achieving citizenship qualities. On the other hand, feminists argue how women in the private sphere participated in certain responsibilities such as unpaid domestic care work, which were not recognized in the public sphere as a citizen's act or obligation. Pascall (1993) argued how this undermines the work and responsibilities women perform in the private sphere and how policies have failed to recognize these acts as responsibilities of citizenship. This raises questions about citizenship claims based on community duties. Consequently, to achieve the “re-gendering” (Lister 2012) of citizenship, it is necessary to initiate policies. How to promote women's political participation and ensure that healthcare is recognized and valued as a civic obligation. However, this would imply a radical change on the feminist front, to ensure that women's social rights can be recognized in citizenship policies. However, during the post-war period, Marshall (1949) founded the social-liberal theory of citizenship – which draws on early classical liberal ideology. The movement to establish social rights such as the right to citizenship is what makes the social-liberal perspective distinctive from earlier liberalism. Marshall's (1949) initiative to incorporate i.373-382).