2 Introduction have always lived there or are even its formal citizens. There are those indi viduals who have moved into a State’s territory, such as: permanent residents, short-term migrant workers, diplomats, tourists and other visitors, longer-term migrants, asylum seekers, those with refugee status, and other displaced persons. Such people might also be en route to that State or at its borders. There are those who lack citizenship where they live, though never having moved. This includes stateless persons, and minorities within a State whose status is disputed or unde termined. It includes formal citizens who suffer discrimination and exclusion, or who contest the State, and so are unable to make full use of their citizenships. Also included are people who relate to States from afar: the colonised, the con quered, and those with more subtle connections, resulting from global and multi lateral systems, or global phenomena like climate change, for example. While these can often be addressed as distinct contexts with special challenges, under standing them in terms of what they have in common – a noncitizen relationship with the State(s) concerned – can help to locate the phenomena as part of a much larger and interconnected challenge. In liberal political thinking, the concern addressed in this book is commonly considered in one of two ways. On the one hand, there is the work of global justice theorists and cosmopolitans who present an expanded liberal theory that, broadly speaking, uses thinking that is usually done on a State level and applies it on the global level.1 On the other hand, there is work specifically directed towards migration, either focusing on the rights of migrants, or on who has access to citizenship or other statuses (including ‘denizenship’). Some do both.2 The notion of unhyphenated noncitizenship can bring these discourses together by providing a unifying analytical category and mode of analysis. Whereas hyphenated ‘non-citizenship’ includes an assumption of lack, a relationship derivative from citizenship, unhyphenated noncitizenship here refers to an individual-State relationship in its own right. ‘Methodological citizenism’ here refers to the assumption that thinking about politics and individual-State relationships must be structured around citizenship. This book interrogates methodological citizenism, suggesting how it may have come about. What I call ‘noncitizenism’ is, then, one response to this. It advoc ates recognition of the reality of liberal noncitizenship as a way in which to understand the circumstances of those individuals (including formal citizens) who are experiencing some form of (non-consensual, vulnerable and challeng ing) noncitizen relationship with a State. 1 Many examples are examined in this book, but some key texts include: Charles Beitz (1979) Polit ical Theory and International Relations, Harvard University Press; Thomas Pogge (2008) World Poverty and Human Rights, 2nd Edition, Polity Press. 2 For example, and in different ways: Seyla Benhabib (2004) The Rights of Others: Aliens, Resi dents, and Citizens, Oxford University Press; Linda Bosniak (2006) The Citizen and the Alien: Dilemmas of Contemporary Membership, Princeton University Press; Joseph Carens (2013) The Ethics of Immigration, Oxford University Press; Saskia Sassen (2000) Guests and Aliens, New Press.