In class, we have already discussed many examples and
theories of citizenship. From Plato’s utopian society to Aristotle’s more
specialized approach to Machiavelli’s manipulation of citizens, every
philosopher, or even every person, has their own ideas about what citizenship
is and what good citizens look like. Plato’s idea was that people should leave
the ruling and decision making to the philosophers, or a single philosopher,
because they are the most thoughtful and intelligent. For this to work, he says
that the philosopher would not be allowed to concern himself with anything
except the wellness of the state; he would not be allowed to marry or even cook
his own food because his mind could only think of the people. Even Plato agrees
that this idealistic society would be difficult to pull off considering human
fault and the many opinions of people. My question to Plato is, why did he not
then create a feasible plan that humans could in fact follow? The theory I consider
the most relevant is Machiavelli’s because it is and has been the most
applicable to modern life; however, I am not and have never been political and
his methods of manipulation do bother me. As much as I believe that these
methods work for election, manipulation of your people in order to get elected
is not an example of good citizenship.
Citizenship to me is consideration for others to create a cooperative and safe community. It means taking care of yourself but making sure you are not hurting or negatively affecting the community by doing so; thinking of others and being a positive agent in society. I try to be this positive agent, but it is hard to always know what to do to be a good citizen. Especially in Italy where I am not sure what the customs are, it’s hard to know what’s appropriate or can be taken as impolite. This makes it a little harder to be the ideal citizen in this new place, and also a little more obvious that we are not REAL citizens of Venice. Hopefully, throughout the semester we will become Venetian citizens by meeting more locals and growing accustomed to the city.
Citizenship in the city of Venice is hard to define because of the declining number of residents. To me, citizens must live in a certain place to be considered a citizen of that place, but I also think that the majority of workers in Venice that commute to the city everyday are also citizens and can therefore be included in the analysis of citizenship to account for the lack of residents. Venice is a very tourist-driven economy, but the people are not so touristy friendly as to tolerate the massive influx of people. This cannot necessarily be considered poor citizenship, however, because there are many problems associated with the tourists that cause this annoyance with them. On the other hand, it can very much be considered good citizenship to be helpful and kind to the tourists. But then again, could it be considered entirely good citizenship to encourage the exploitation of Venice? Citizenship in this regard would be concerning the betterment of the society. Can being kind to tourists encourage them to suggest Venice to their friends thus furthering the tourist problem and ultimately destroying the sanctity of Venice as a city and not Disney World?
However, there are other ways to be good citizens in Venice! Shop owners who sweep and power wash their small areas in front of their stores, people who pick up after their dog, and local “pubs” (for instance) that give free food to returning customers. These are small things that go a long way. Even seemingly insignificant acts can go a long way in society and creating a more cooperative and safe community!
Citizenship to me is consideration for others to create a cooperative and safe community. It means taking care of yourself but making sure you are not hurting or negatively affecting the community by doing so; thinking of others and being a positive agent in society. I try to be this positive agent, but it is hard to always know what to do to be a good citizen. Especially in Italy where I am not sure what the customs are, it’s hard to know what’s appropriate or can be taken as impolite. This makes it a little harder to be the ideal citizen in this new place, and also a little more obvious that we are not REAL citizens of Venice. Hopefully, throughout the semester we will become Venetian citizens by meeting more locals and growing accustomed to the city.
Citizenship in the city of Venice is hard to define because of the declining number of residents. To me, citizens must live in a certain place to be considered a citizen of that place, but I also think that the majority of workers in Venice that commute to the city everyday are also citizens and can therefore be included in the analysis of citizenship to account for the lack of residents. Venice is a very tourist-driven economy, but the people are not so touristy friendly as to tolerate the massive influx of people. This cannot necessarily be considered poor citizenship, however, because there are many problems associated with the tourists that cause this annoyance with them. On the other hand, it can very much be considered good citizenship to be helpful and kind to the tourists. But then again, could it be considered entirely good citizenship to encourage the exploitation of Venice? Citizenship in this regard would be concerning the betterment of the society. Can being kind to tourists encourage them to suggest Venice to their friends thus furthering the tourist problem and ultimately destroying the sanctity of Venice as a city and not Disney World?
However, there are other ways to be good citizens in Venice! Shop owners who sweep and power wash their small areas in front of their stores, people who pick up after their dog, and local “pubs” (for instance) that give free food to returning customers. These are small things that go a long way. Even seemingly insignificant acts can go a long way in society and creating a more cooperative and safe community!