Open tompace opened 3 years ago
@tompace Would you feel comfortable with either [1] drafting a definition of a word or [2] reading a draft as an editor?
hey @tompace it's really good point.
I'll support residency for a couple of reasons for a general shift on that; but as-is citizenship, is aligning with community membership much better. please find my reasoning below:
semantically, term includes other livings as well. however membership is consciously made, willing action.
on the other hand, community membership is not bound to locality, yet residency and citizenship, have that notion.
In fact, membership in a community is more like citizenship as-is, that can be sustained remotely, physical or moral detachment from that land is somehow not welcomed.
that's why citizenship and being member in a community resonates much better.
residency is more dependent to locality. upon a migration to another city/country, that status is changed.
people are mostly no longer kept registered to where they came from. ( we have entered to an era, with people living in multiple cities though .. multi-residency ) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVPLqbWXdDA
currently, de-facto, there exists a global socio-bureaucratic cast system:
which goes like: citizen > resident > tourist > ...
this is fucked up. all people are legal and equal. all stuff is happening because that one particular reality, is never acknowledged as base of equality.
everyone's one second of life, is equally valuable.
states are currently, an abstraction that isolate people.
citizenship, as-is a "certification of isolation"
the term residency, is more likely succeed in including other livings too.
my opinion is citizenship is more alike to community membership. // both sustain and exist based rules/ constitutions widely accepted or propagated, regardless of locality and their formation, with relative constants and dynamics.