At no time has the issue of citizenship and rights become so pertinent as it is now when the whole concept of citizenry needs to be revised as a result of the prevailing global political, social and economic relations. This is mainly because these relations assume features that are substantially different from what they used to connote at the time of their emergence. Globalization of the market has basically transferred these relationships and they have now assumed new forms. It is indeed unavoidable and important then to reflect on constructions concomitant to these new forms of relationships. Hence, this paper intends to provoke discussion on a few constructs it postulates in describing these relationships as well as the solutions it provides. 

I.            Citizenry 

Citizenry in the proper terms of its definition emerged with the nation state in Europe that in turn entered the scene of modern history in the wake the Industrial Revolution. The triumphant bourgeoisie hoisted the torch of freedom with heavy emphasis on the freedom of the individual a concept and practice previously trampled underfoot by the pre-capitalist state. Political, social and economic institutions were built up to live upto the promises made by the emerging and triumphant bourgeoisie. As social power gave way to economic and as the economic gave way to political power, the bourgeoisie finally prevailed to institutionalize individual freedom as the kernel of its political credo. With the prevalence of individual freedom and the setting up of the modern institutions to make these freedoms be realized and practiced even by the heretofore forgotten individual, the subject of the yesteryears was transformed to a citizen of the modern nation state. 

Thus, the citizen of the industrial revolution was born. The citizen being a product of that epoch shared the prevailing perceptions of the time which were in the main the ideas of the ruling elite. These ideas were advanced to rationalize the economic and political interests of the elite. With the economic expansion of the bourgeoisie also expanded the philosophical scope of the elite; political economy emerged and developed followed by various schools of social science. With the development of the economy the power of the elite to rationalize its rule also developed and became powerful. These ideas in turn were largely shared by the citizen. Despite attempts by various schools to the contrary the citizen shared the historical as well as political and social constructions of the elite. Though these were challenged in the latter half of the 18th Century and a strong deconstructing undercurrent emerged, bourgeois rule managed to prevail throughout the time. That has enormous impact in shaping and molding the mentality and psyche of the citizen of the industrial revolution. In other words, the citizen of the time was indeed a creation of the bourgeoisie. Thus, the strong imprint of individualism and compartmentalization in the psyche of the citizen of that particular society. 

II.            Citizenry Revisited under Globalization of the Market 

A UNRISD (the United Nations Research Institute for Social Development) report presented an unusually fascinating report for a UN agency to the 1995 World Summit for Social Development entitled States of Disarray: The Social Effects of Globalization. The UNRISD report contains a section on global citizenship as an issue to be reckoned with. On citizenship per se the report says, “Citizenship has three central propositions: equality in individual and human rights; free and universal political participation; and state responsibility to ensure adequate standards of human welfare. The time has come to extend these principles internationally: to focus attention explicitly on global citizenship” (UNRISD, 1995: 19, italics mine).  This is an excellent frame to extrapolate the concept and practice of global citizenship as contemporary citizenship needs to be defined and determined from the egalitarian perspective, political participation and the responsibility of the “state” at the international plane. The “state” here, in the international sense, involves not only the national state but also the global regimes namely the Bretton Woods institutions (IMF and Wold Bank) and the WTO. These are the vectors of the globalization of the market that has affected the entire world and the South in particular.