Introduction

The title of this article deals with a rather particular dimension of the status of the individual in society: the dimension of ‘citizen’. According to the Larousse dictionary, this is basically understood as a set of rights and duties dedicated to the individual (man), which confers citizenship. Current human societies have almost all been constituted on the basis of ideas inherited from ancient Greece and Rome. In this context, it appears that there is a close link between citizenship and the institutions that organise societal dynamics, of which the State is the most prestigious. The purpose of this article is to share our outline of ideas on what explains the tumultuous relationship of individuals to institutions in our times in the hope of achieving a better social balance. 

       I would take this thought out of context (although the background of this statement is capillary to the problem of citizenship) to mean that everywhere in the world the walls of our civilisations are shaking. The transformations of our current history, at the same time as they bring to light the questioning of the rights of individuals (due to the parameters imposed by socio-political-technical evolutions…), have repercussions on the questioning of the social pact, with the effect of removing the individual’s complexes from his obligations to the highest degree: even when, in some places, it is force that dictates the law. 

How does this appear?

How does this appear? Even more than in the past, humanity is in a transitional phase. Citizenship, in our opinion, is now in crisis in the face of changes that all have one common denominator: the gradual change in people’s perceptions of the link that binds them to the governing class, with the resulting impression of an imbalance in the balance of power. For at the root of it all, whatever the political system, whether it is democratic or has a more restrictive control of individual freedoms, this link, regardless of its nature, is a structuring relationship. Reading our times, it is as if technical progress has brought about an avalanche that has blurred the roles. The drift of the link is manifested by the crisis of legitimacy of the elites in a context of democracy, who have lost the “myth” of their functions through hyper-mediatisation and, moreover, the failure of these elites to face the magnitude of the responsibilities that are theirs in this context. These leaders have to deal with citizens who are increasingly well-informed, through modern communication tools, about the ins and outs of public policy. Another factor can be noted: in certain contexts, the sedimentation in time and in political space of a class of individuals who, for the grassroots, undermine the reforming vocation of the State in itself and for society, by the absence of its renewal, the accumulation of mandates and the stabilization of elected officials has the effect of creating the feeling that the proximity of the elected official to the State (the public office he or she holds) qualifies him or her to usefully represent his or her grassroots, rather than his or her closeness to the grassroots. 

What are the consequences of this?  

Two situations arise from this: the leaders relatively consciously settle into a self-interested position from which all suspicions of scandal on the part of the popular base are born. Then Celle, in the deep scepticism that she nourishes, vomits her administration. This leads to an inescapable confrontation; the elite at worst having to justify its role only by maintaining order as an argument through the various tools it has been given, both in terms of letters and weapons. As a result, democracies become more rigid and dictatorships more difficult.   

Conclusion

Since any natural process always leads to stabilisation, the transformation of society is not exempt from this.  Every citizen, regardless of his or her background, should be aware of his or her role in the outcome, because even if he or she is not aware of it, he or she still plays a role. So that, ideally, in good intelligence, we all emerge from this situation as better people.