College Essay on "Citizen"

Hello fellow Freepers. I am writing an essay defining "citizen" and the meaning of the word.

"A person owing loyalty to and entitled by birth or naturalization to the protection of a state or nation."

I want to write about the differences of being an American Citizen to being an Iraqi citizen and I would like to especially concentrate on the "owing loyalty to" part of the definition. I am going to write that I think citizens of the United States should respect and be loyal to their nation considering the wonderful privileges and rights we have, that other Countries do not have. Also, that as citizens of the world, Americans have the duty to defend citizens of other countries who are mistreated and oppressed.

Thus far, I cannot find anything online that would be helpful in writing this paper, and I was wondering if anyone had any ideas or knowledge in this area. Any criticism or opinions in this matter will help greatly.

You don't have to do it... It has already been written and approved by congress.

Below is the creed, and some comments I made on another forum.

The American's Creed

by William Tyler Page

"I believe in the United States of America as a government of the people,
by the people, for the people; whose just powers are derived from the
consent of the governed, a democracy in a republic, a sovereign Nation of
many sovereign States; a perfect union, one and inseparable; established
upon those principles of freedom, equality, justice, and humanity for
which American patriots sacrificed their lives and fortunes.

"I therefore believe it is my duty to my country to love it, to support
its Constitution, to obey its laws to respect its flag, and to defend it
against all enemies."

-- Written 1917, accepted by the United States House of Representatives on
April 3, 1918.

I was listening to callers, on a TV show call in and voice their opinion
for or against the Iraq War for Freedom. One man made an excellent point,
and I can't quote him exactly but he said something like this, "If I fail
to support my President and not obey when my country issues orders to
either serve or support my country, I then fail in my duty to my country.
I then am denying the very place I live."

I am not even saying it as clear and concise as the caller did. But the
logic was very clear. The place we live, did kill Indians, we did have
slaves, we had bad foreign policies, and fought bad wars. But, the place
we live is still the beacon to the world for freedom and personal liberty,
although not a perfect society or government, America's founding precepts
are our inheritance and the envy of the whole world. To fail in giving
your allegiance and perform your duty, according to the above creed is to
deny the place you live, this is not logical. If you pursue what is
illogical, your pursuit becomes irrelevant.

Our president and appointed leaders, have declared Saddam Hussein and the
Hussein Regime a dangerous enemy to the United States and to the world.
The time for protesting and dissension has past, our troops, our
president, our country, needs the support of its citizens.

The hardest part of your assignment isn't in defining what your loyalties are, but to what they're owed. What IS the "state or nation" to which the obligation of citizenry accrues? Is it a document (the Constitution); is it an office (the presidency); is it an idea or a collection of ideas ("liberty", "freedom")? Is it just an arbitrary set of laws? And if those parameters change, if those documents become unrecognizable, those offices corrupted, those ideas moribund, if indeed the obligation of the state or nation to you ceases, does your obligation cease in turn?

If you have any fresh insights on THOSE questions, make sure you post them for the world to see.

Good questions!

"And if those parameters change, if those documents become unrecognizable, those offices corrupted, those ideas moribund, if indeed the obligation of the state or nation to you ceases, does your obligation cease in turn?"

Yes, your obligation to your state or nation cease in turn. As in Iraq's case, the people are opressed, the regime corrupt. The country of Iraq does not fulfill its obligations to its people. Therefore, the people have every right to cease their loyalties and obligations to the Country of Iraq.

In America, we are aloud to do anything we please... to a fault. In this "land of the free" we are given freedom of speech. We are aloud to speak out on the government and what it stands for, but should we? When blood has spilled to protect our nation and that blood belongs to the brave men and women of our armed forces, is it not tyrany to speak out against our soldiers, spit on them and call them baby-killers? Does this not go beyond Freedom of Speech and become the acts of a traitor?

Loyalties are owed to the Constitution, the Presidency, and liberty and freedom. Can't they be owed to all three? But moreover, loyalties are owed to the Men and Women who have laid down their lives to protect us and the ones who are risking their lives...

Is this an acceptable response?! What do you think?

First, a quibble. It's "allowed," not "aloud." Doesn't matter much to me, but your professor might slam you for it. Now, on to the more important issue.

Your response, while heartwarming, lacks depth. It's too vague to be meaningful. For instance,

... loyalties are owed to the Men and Women who have laid down their lives to protect us and the ones who are risking their lives...

You've struck gold with this thesis. We owe our loyalties not to any organized, static institution, but rather to our brother and sister CITIZENS! But that begs the question you raised as well: what of those citizens we oppose? What is the nature of our obligation to them? Is there one? Are they "tyrants" because they voice their opposition? Do we exclude them from our citizenry because of their opinions? What gives us ownership of the discourse?

I don't mean to be harsh, and in fact you're clearly on the right track. But it's easy when writing a piece like this to indulge yourself in platitudes, and dodge the core issue, which is social contract.

There are numerous enlightening books on that subject, and I think you'll find, as you pursue your study, that your feelings were right. Hopefully the thoughts of some visionary men and women can aid you in refining those feelings into beliefs, and those beliefs into expression. (Personally, I would start with Russell Kirk's The Conservative Mind.)

Mine the gold.

Good luck. And please, feel free to FReepmail me with the final product.

Well, you should probably start by presenting the origins of the word. Latin civis and civitas should be familiar to you; civis was citizen, and civitas was the body of citizens, later coming to mean a city. So, linguistically, civilization descends from cities and citizens. The use of the word citizen is attested in the English language as early as the second decade of the 14th century, though it may well have been in use earlier, as a borrowing of French (or maybe Anglo-Frisian, but don't quote me on that). Lots of other fun stuff in the OED.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.