iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

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.

100

Cambridge University Press Political Science & IR @cambup-polsci.cambridge.org · 10/10/2025

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.

100

Reposted by Lior Erez

#OpenAccess from @apsrjournal.bsky.social - Citizenship Renunciation without Emigration - cup.org/4nTVQZh "argues for the value of citizenship renunciation as an expressive political act, distinct from territorial exit..." - @liorerez.bsky.social #FirstView

Banner featuring the hashtag #OpenAccess over a green background and the text "American Political Science Review" on a blue background.

021

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

100

A surprising statistic: over 30% of articles published in early view in APSR in the last three weeks had an author called 'Lior'

000

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

000

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.

210

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.

100

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.

100

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.

GLOBALCIT @globalcit.bsky.social · 15/09/2025

Reposted by Lior Erez

📢 New Open-Access Working Paper! @artsofdenial.bsky.social & Rainer Bauböck ask: Citizenship as Reparations: Should the Victims of Historical Injustice Be Offered Membership❓ 13 authors reply 💬, exploring questions of justice, colonialism, nation-building, and more 🌍 📖 🔗 tinyurl.com/dz8ht87z

tinyurl.com

086

Reposted by Lior Erez

Daniel Sharp @deeesharp.bsky.social · 26/06/2025

My introduction to the special issue on relational equality & migration is now out! It provides a comprehensive introduction to the state of the debate about relational egalitarianism & migration + an overview of the special issue contributions doi.org/10.1515/mopp... #philsky #poltheory #migcitsky

doi.org

Relational Egalitarianism and Migration: An Introduction

In this introductory essay to the special issue on relational equality and migration, I first introduce a familiar way of conceiving of the connection between equality and migration, one that focuses ...

1169

Lior Erez @liorerez.bsky.social · 27/06/2025

Good news! "The flag and the stick: Aid suspensions, human rights, and the problem of the complicit public", written by the Bluesky-less Niheer Dasandi and yours truly, and published in World Development, is the 2025 @ElsevierAtlas Award Winner (Peace and Justice Theme) t.co/igWqbH807Y

t.co

https://www.elsevier.com/connect/atlas/about

111

Reposted by Lior Erez

Dimitry Kochenov Yaroslavsky @profkochenov.bsky.social · 23/06/2025

Comm v.Malta seminar at @ucl.ac.uk Laws on June 4, convened by @colmocinneide.bsky.social A variety of takes 🇪🇺EU illiberal turn; merit to philosophical & comparative. Horrible video/cool conversation❗️https://youtu.be/2CtESu1Y4Qs @liorerez.bsky.social @maartenpvink.bsky.social @globalcit.bsky.social

033

Reposted by Lior Erez

UCL European Institute @uclei.bsky.social · 04/06/2025

Fascinating and important conversation on the groundbreaking CJEU judgment of European Commission v Malta with @profkochenov.bsky.social, @sarahganty.bsky.social, Dr Oliver Gerstenberg, @liorerez.bsky.social and @msumption.bsky.social, chaired by Dr Claudia Sternberg @laws.ucl.ac.uk

144

Reposted by Lior Erez

Political Studies @polstudies.bsky.social · 10/06/2025

IN NEW ISSUE: Many argue for limits on a state's right to exclude potential members, but what about limiting inclusion? @liorerez.bsky.social‬ & Ayelet Banai argue the principle of self-determination offers an answer: buff.ly/jmaaqyA (OPEN ACCESS) @polstudiesassoc.bsky.social @sagepub.com #polsci

buff.ly

033

Lior Erez @liorerez.bsky.social · 19/05/2025

'Self-Determination and the Limits on the Right to Include', with Ayelet Banai, now in the new @polstudies.bsky.social. We explore the limits on the state's right to include new citizens, and argue that the principle of self-determination supports such limits. journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...

journals.sagepub.com

Self-Determination and the Limits on the Right to Include - Lior Erez, Ayelet Banai, 2025

States’ right to exclude prospective members is the subject of a fierce debate in political theory, but the right to include has received relatively little scho...

062

Reposted by Lior Erez

GLOBALCIT @globalcit.bsky.social · 03/04/2025

⚡❗New Entry ⚡❗ Does historical injustice create a right to citizenship, or is it just a policy choice? @liorerez.bsky.social argues that reparative citizenship isn’t a right – it is permissible but not required. States may offer it, but they don’t have to. 🇪🇸🇵🇹⚖️ 🔗 globalcit.eu/citizenship-...

globalcit.eu

Citizenship as Reparations: Should the victims of historical injustice be offered membership? - Page 5 of 5 - Globalcit

Kickoff contribution by David Owen and Rainer Bauböck. Comments by Jocelyn Kane and Patti Tamara Lenard, Ashley Mantha-Hollands , Timothy Jacob-Owens and Lior Erez Read More ...

062

That is the theory in a nutshell. This is a premilinary exploration into this question, so hopefully more on this shortly. Looking forward to hear what you think in the meantime! [5]

100

In our way out of this impasse, the conditional view, we argue that the right to self-determination does allow a freedom to include, which is limited by the equal right to self-determination of other states. The limits arise from the value of self-determination itself [4]

Is there such a thing as 'permissible inclusion'? We argue that political theory is divided: Either the state has the right to determine its own membership rules (=Yes), or membership rules are determined by an external normative theory (e.g. jus nexi), and then No. [3]

In this article, instead of asking when do individuals have a claim to be included, we ask whether (and when) may the state can include individuals who do not have such a claim. Consider cases of citizenship by investment or granting citizenship to athletes. [2]

100

My article with Ayelet Banai is now available (open access!) in @polstudies.bsky.social ! We ask what are the limits on the state's right to include new citizens, and argue that, surprisingly, the principle of self-determination supports such limits.

2116