Why Politicians Should Refrain from Calling Citizens 'Subjects'

Every time I hear a contemporary political figure refer to their citizens as 'subjects,' it feels like stepping back into the shadow of feudalism. In the twenty-first century, this term is not only outdated but also gravely misrepresentative of the foundation of modern democratic societies. The relationship between a government and its people should be built on principles of dignity, representation, and mutual respect. By using the term 'subjects,' politicians inadvertently undermining the very essence of their democratic mandate.

Citizenship: The Foundation of Representative Democracy

First and foremost, citizens are not 'subjects'; rather, they are first-class citizens. In any country, the people come first. The primary framework of any democratic society centers around the idea that the citizens, the public, are the ones holding the ultimate power. Politicians and other government officials are elected to represent the interests of these citizens, not to rule over them like their subjects. This concept is core to the idea of representative democracy, where the people have a voice and a stake in their governance.

The Historical Context of 'Subjects'

Historically, the term 'subject' pertained to individuals who were beholden to a monarch or an autocratic power. Dating back to the times of kings and queens, this terminology denoted a hierarchical system where people operated under the authority and rule of a single sovereign figure. In such a setup, the people who worked under the king or queen were indeed considered property in a way, with no real say in their governance or daily lives. This stark contrast with the democratic principles that underpin modern governance.

The Role of Elected Officials

Elected officials hold a unique and distinct role in modern democracy. Their responsibility is to represent the will and interests of their constituents, not to dictate them. When elected officials use the term 'subjects,' it sends a message that the people are subservient to their authority, which is antithetical to the principles of democracy. In a democratic system, citizens are active participants, not passive entities.

The Power of Terminology

The power of language is immense and can shape perceptions and attitudes. The terminology used by government officials can subtly influence the public's understanding of their relationship with its elected leaders and the government as a whole. By using outdated and regressive terminology like 'subjects,' politicians risk perpetuating a harmful narrative that undermines the dignity and autonomy of citizens. This can have serious implications for the health of a democracy, fostering a culture where the government is seen as a ruling entity rather than a servant of the people.

The Importance of Mutual Respect

The relationship between citizens and their government should be built on mutual respect and understanding. When politicians address their citizens as 'subjects,' it erodes the very foundation of this relationship. Instead, a positive, respectful, and transparent dialogue should be encouraged. This ensures that the citizens feel valued and informed, which in turn strengthens the democratic fabric of society.

Conclusion

In conclusion, politicians should be fully aware of the implications of using outdated and regressive terminology. By refraining from calling their citizens 'subjects,' they can help promote a healthier, more democratic relationship with their electorate. The relationship between citizens and their government should be characterized by respect, responsibility, and representation, not by a throwback to a bygone era of autocracy.

Keywords

citizenship, misguided terminology, representative democracy