28 chapter one As a result, modern political theories about citizenship, its processes, practices and consequences, in the form of liberal, republican and ethnonational citizenships are growing increasingly inadequate. Despite their respective differences, such typologies of citizenship – as those outlined by Gershon Shafir and Yoav Peled and further explained in Chapter Five – mostly remain state-centric and dependent on that ground as the main source of legitimacy and authority. But while these models of citizenship may help us understand the nature and characteristics of various forms of rights, representation and responsibilities that exist across liberal-­ democratic states, they are unable to capture the inherent changes in the processes and practices of citizenship in the twenty-first century (Isin and Turner 2002, 4). In other words, the dislodging of a geographically defined territory as the sole source and benefactor of the acts and practices of citizenship through forces of globalization and post-modernist forms of organization has expanded the way in which citizenship is discussed and realized, in a manner that has yet to be sufficiently captured by liberal, republican and ethno-national models of citizenship. Citizenship beyond the State In a powerful introduction to the study of citizenship, social science scholar Engin F. Isin provides insight on how it is that citizenship is usually approached by academics. He points out that … routinized academic practices, where the origins of ‘city’, ‘democracy’ and ‘citizenship’ are etymologically traced to the ‘Greek’, ‘Roman’ and ‘medieval’ cities, and affinities between ‘their’ and ‘our’ practices [in contemporary Western liberal societies] are established, not only orient toward but also reproduce such images. After being ‘reminded’ that polis, politics and polity; civitas, citizenship and civility; and demos and democracy have ‘common roots’, we are provided with images of virtuous Greek citizens debating in the agora or the pnyx, austere Roman citizens deliberating in the republican senate, and ‘European’ citizens receiving their charters in front of the guildhall (Isin 2002, 305). This recurring tendency among citizenship scholars and political theorists ought to be acknowledged, and the imagined political and conceptual links provoked by etymological references between ancient forms of citizenship and that which exists in contemporary liberal societies under conditions of modern capitalism and globalization ought also to be made explicit and challenged. Otherwise our approach to the study of citizenship would not only continue to fail to capture the specific textures and