That said, while the dilemma is meant to motivate the main argument through negation (if no mandatory citizenship for residents, therefore.. etc), I think that the positive argument on pp. 5-10 can be persuasive even if you don't see an incoherence in the status quo

The second is that the status quo reflects some tension between competing underlying conceptions of the value and function of citizenship itself, between ascriptivism and voluntarism.

Thanks - on p.3 ('The Dilemma') I argue that the status quo is incoherent for two reasons. The first is equality of treatment - if noncitizens and citizens are similarly situated, why should the former be afforded the freedom to choose to become citizens.

Haven't really thought about it through the NB framework, but this makes sense I think; lowering the cost of renunciation reinforces the legitimacy signal of staying

May be of interest: @deeesharp.bsky.social @artsofdenial.bsky.social @rebeccabuxton.bsky.social @pattitlenard.bsky.social

5. a right to renounce without emigrating strengthens autonomy and democratic legitimacy. It places less burden on dissenters and offers a more consistent account of citizenship. /end

4. Instead, I defend renunciation as expressive political exit. It is a way for citizens to formally sever political ties while staying socially embedded. It’s distinct from emigration: it retains membership in society while withdrawing consent.

3. I reject the idea of mandatory citizenship for residents (as prominently defended recently by de Schutter and
@leaypi.bsky.social
).The coercive cost of forcing naturalisation is hard to justify.

2. The article opens with a dilemma: long-term resident noncitizens can refuse to naturalise, but citizens often can’t renounce unless they leave. Either citizenship for residents should be mandatory, or renunciation without emigration should be permitted.

1. I argue that citizens should be able to renounce their citizenship while remaining residents. The current norm (both in law and normative theory) ties renunciation to emigration. But I argue that this link deserves rethinking.

My contribution, building on the framework I develop in my book project, is that reparative citizenship could be permissible even when it does not generate a right to citizenship. See here:

globalcit.eu/citizenship-...

And the winning article itself:

www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...

Here is the abstract: