SMC Global Citizenship

Santa Monica College promotes global citizenship—developing, sharing, and using inter-cultural understanding to foster a more livable, sustainable world. Visit for more details.
Contributing Authors
Posts tagged "global citizenship"

Der Spiegel cover, 28 November 2011

"And now?," Der Spiegel asked last month. Not only what does the future hold for the disintegrating Euro, but what does it hold for the EU, and the idea of Europe in general?

It is the patriotism of global citizens who are concerned about human rights…where citizens feel a sense of patriotism based on their shared political values rather than a shared ethnic identity or language. Such a pan-national patriotism is also based on an international consensus that has produced new institutions like the International Criminal Court in The Hague, which stands guard over the ethical values of a postnational society.

This, from the last of a three-part series on EU reconfiguration in Der Spiegel is, admittedly, not the pithiest of quotes, and it presumably worked better in the original German. But it reveals the transformative times in which we live with respect to the practice of citizenship in a global age. Few corners of the globe have not been significantly impacted by debates about democracy in this year of perpetual crisis. Some places, such as China and, especially, Russia, have clung strongly to older models of modern authoritarianism and international diplomacy driven by a philosophy of inviolable sovereignty tempered only by narrow definitions of national geostrategic interest. Other places, such as Myanmar (Burma), appear to be softening their old authoritarian ways. Of course, no part of the world has experienced more convulsive political change than northern Africa and southwestern Asia, where a continuing “Arab Spring” proceeds toward democracy in ways that none of us can fully anticipate. Meanwhile, in the United States—long the modern world’s standard bearer for democracy—government has become mired in partisan paralysis, sending countless citizens into the streets in order to voice frustrations from the political left, right, and center.

It is in Europe, though, that I think our evolving ideas of global citizenship and democracy will primarily take form. The United States ceased to be a political experiment many generations ago, and for both better and worse, we are not likely to see USA 2.0 any time soom. Europe, however, remains a lively experimental concept, and the European Union never has made it past its own beta testing. Will the Euro crisis be the trigger that forces bold action, so that 2012 becomes the year in which EU 1.0 is finally rolled out? Probably not, but if a new Europe really is formed, its shape will go a long way toward clarifying what global citizenship in the 21st century will look like. In addition to the "pan-national" or "postnational" values-based patriotism described in the quote above, the same Der Spiegel article suggests that 21st-century democratic citizenship will require a new practice of democratic discourse that is both participatory and led by “fascinating leaders” who have interesting stories to tell. In other words, boredom and complexity are two of the stiffest obstacles we face in trying to create a more democratic global society.

This is our challenge. Particularly in the field of education (including our colleagues in journalism), we have to find ways to make stories about complicated issues, such as climate change and sovereign-debt crises, interesting. And we have to develop global citizens who take interest in complicated stories. Otherwise, we face an endless future of simplistic narratives that yield only the disastrous inaction of cynicism or the even more disastrous action of fascism.

The summer of 2011 has certainly tried the faith of committed optimists such as myself. After an inspiring start to the calendar year, with the blossoming of democracy in the so-called Arab Spring and cautious indications that the world economy was regaining in footing, things have taken a decided turn for the worse. The democratic revolutions in the Arab world have stalled in a tragic, if not entirely unexpected, bloody quagmire, and the global economy hasn’t just stalled; it appears to be imploding in a fantastic mess of market fears and political ineffectiveness. Add riots on the streets of London, famine in East Africa, continuing nuclear catastrophe in Japan, a Euro zone on the brink of collapse, and crisis in any number of other forms just about anywhere one looks, and it’s safe to say we live in challenging times.

Jean-Pierre Lehmann, Professor of International Political Economy at Switzerland’s International Institute for Management Development, reminds us this week that 70 years ago, in another time of intense global crisis, one of the 20th century’s most significant global documents was crafted: the Atlantic Charter. Initially an agreement between the heads of just two national states—the UK and the USA—it became one of the founding documents of NATO and a statement of principles that would come to be embodied in a wide variety of post-war global institutions, most notably the UN.

Professor Lehmann urges us to remember the Atlantic Charter and to envision a more global, 21st-century replacement. For all of our current crises, he argues, perhaps none is more concerning than the crisis of confidence in the post-war global project envisioned by world leaders during the 1940s.

There is a depressing feeling, especially among the youth of the world — such a high proportion of whom are unemployed — that things may be getting worse and the future looking bleaker.

The world has made no real progress with respect to the three most vital priorities on the global policy agenda: nuclear non-proliferation, trade and climate change. While globalization in the last two decades has brought down multiple barriers and opened the world to an unprecedented degree, it has not brought about a spirit of collaboration among states.

It is that last point—the eroding “spirit of collaboration among states” (and, I would add, among competing political parties within states)—that most worries Professor Lehmann and leads him to call for a new “post-Atlantic Global Charter”. If nothing else, please take some time to read the original Atlantic Charter, as well as the other comparable documents I’ve linked below. Together they lay out principles that are no less inspiring and relevant today than they were when originally written—in part because we have, at times, strayed rather far from these values. Indeed, it seems that now, more than ever, is a time when the U.S. and the rest of the world need to make a (re)new(ed) pledge of global cooperation, as well as the political leadership to realize that vision. As President Roosevelt himself said, just one year after the Atlantic Charter’s signing, “We reaffirm our principles. They will bring us to a happier world.”

Some more inspiration:

Once you get past the extreme example of 8-year-old Happy Rogers and her über-affluent, über-ambitious family of expat Americans living in Singapore, this Newsweek article touches on issues of immense significance. How do we educate future generations to be effective global citizens?

Whether viewed from a patriotic stance of preserving American competitiveness, or a global idealist’s stance of harmoniously contributing to a world-wide community, this is an important question for all of us. It’s important because, in the words of the article,

America is so far utterly failing to produce a generation of global citizens.

Now, the tone of the article isn’t always so blunt and hyperbolic. This is a nuanced issue, and the author, Lisa Miller, is correct to point out that, “There is no consensus on remedies.” Does a global education mean more (or at least some) foreign-language development? Most certainly, yes. Does a global education mean more (or at least some) meaningful experiences in other countries? Yes, again. Does a global education mean more (or at least some) study of world geography and history, as well as important global political-economic and environmental issues and systems? Of course. And what about philosophy and the great questions of the humanities? It seems essential that we develop literacy not only in our cultural inheritance from “western” civilization(s)—which itself is lacking—but also in other great traditions of what it means to be a citizen of planet Earth and its countless local communities. There is no single “global” approach to education, and this one article’s headline would have been more appropriately written as an open-ended question rather than a statement: How do we raise a global kid?

Hopefully most of those who read the article will realize that one doesn’t have to go to the length of the Rogers family, or even that of Miller’s family, who were able to spend a year in Amsterdam when she was 15. Such commitments to a lengthy immersion in another country require a combination of zeal, financial resources, and personal flexibility that very few of us have—a major reason why the geographically far-flung military is perhaps the greatest globalizing institution we have in the United States. Fortunately, though, global education is not an all-or-nothing proposition, nor is it confined to one’s childhood. Becoming a global citizen is a project of lifelong learning that is, indeed, about one’s attitude and values as much as anything else.