Abstract

In her timely monograph, The People in Question, Jo Shaw provides a much-needed critical comparative review of the complex interactions between citizenship and constitutional law. I argue that, despite its emphasis upon citizenship’s essentially contested nature, Shaw’s latest work contains rich moral commitments and an important caution against uncritically eliding ‘full citizenship’ with ‘political membership’ more broadly construed. To establish these claims, I present a tripartite taxonomy of approaches to defining ‘the people’ based, respectively, upon the concepts of status, subjugation and duty. I claim that Shaw’s incisive analysis demonstrates perfectly why we should avoid placing undue reliance upon ‘status-based’ models of community membership and conclude by advancing an original, alternative and hybridised model of ‘the people in question’.

中文翻译：

---

政治成员的三种模式：描述“有问题的人”†

摘要

在她及时的专着《有问题的人》中, Jo Shaw 对公民身份和宪法之间复杂的相互作用进行了急需的批判性比较审查。我认为，尽管强调公民本质上有争议的性质，Shaw 的最新作品包含丰富的道德承诺和重要的警告，反对不加批判地取消“完全公民”和更广泛地解释“政治成员”。为了确立这些主张，我提出了一种三方分类法，分别基于地位、征服和义务的概念来定义“人民”。我声称，Shaw 的精辟分析完美地说明了为什么我们应该避免过度依赖“基于地位”的社区成员模型，并通过推进“相关人员”的原始、替代和混合模型得出结论。