Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This article develops a critical discourse analysis of Australian youth and community policies, examined through a discussion of theoretical debates about citizenship and vulnerability. Informed by a Foucauldian genealogical approach, it explores citizenship, not in terms of rights and universal categories, but in terms of relational, situated and dividing practices. Two major relationships are examined: the relationship between local communities and citizens, including the relationship between space and citizenship; and the relational construction of virtuous and vulnerable citizens. Vulnerability can refer to negative difference and weakness and it can denote a compassionate disposition and openness to difference. It is argued that in neo-liberal policy discourses vulnerability becomes tied to a ‘conversion narrative’ that renders social–structural marginalisation an individual responsibility and re-inscribes developmental explanations of social exclusion. This analysis of Australian policy discourses opens up questions regarding transnational citizenship and vulnerability that warrant further comparative and empirical investigation; and it invites a rethinking of the theoretical framing of youth citizenship, which has implications for conceptualising and conducting comparative youth studies in education.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Julie McLeod (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: