Drawing primarily on the attached articles titled ” marshall.pdf by Ben Revi “, ” norman.pdf ” as well as “taylor.pdf “, (please focus on section IV from pages 35-43 for the taylor.pdf article).Answer and discuss the following question(s): What types of rights are necessary for citizenship in contemporary plural societies like Canada? Are Marshall’s “universal rights” of citizenship enough to allow for equal participation in a contemporary society? Do they go “too far”, or not far enough? Must we move to some model of “differentiated citizenship” (as outlined by Kymlicka & Norman i.e the “norman.pdf ” attached article) in order to promote effective inclusion and participation? In your answer/paper be sure to: • Explain and evaluate the central features of modern citizenship as clarified by T.H. Marshall i.e from the “marshall.pdf ” article. Be sure to refer to his ideas about the requirements of full citizenship and clarify the nature of all three types of citizenship rights he outlines. Explain and discuss how he believed they contributed to equality and participation in society.

• Explain and evaluate the critical arguments highlighted by Revi from the “marshall.pdf ” attached article. Note that while he summarizes some critical gaps and worrisome omissions in Marshall, he nevertheless remains committed to Marshall’s social rights framework as a useful way to address the unresolved tensions within capitalist states. Be sure to address the specific argument by some critics that social rights may promote “passive citizens”. • Explain and evaluate the “solution” highlighted by Kymlicka and Norman (noted in the Ben Revi article about T.H.marshall as well) to address marginalized groups through “differentiated citizenship”. Can problems of diversity and social and political marginalization be addressed through the “special representation rights”, “multicultural rights” or the “self-government rights” they discuss? What are the alternatives (if any)? • Comment, even if briefly, on how your answer connects to either (a) debates about religious accommodation presently underway in Quebec or (b) to Indigenous Canadians’ struggles for reconciliation with the government of Canada. General note: These are big questions about how we promote belonging and identification through legal frameworks rather than through lazy strategies of scapegoating (which seem to be growing in popularity once again). Stay focused on the core question(s) you are asked to answer. Importantly, you need not find any one of the arguments or options presented to be a wholly adequate “solution”.

"Get 15% discount on your first 3 orders with us"
Use the following coupon

Order Now