26 chapter one for rights and entitlements are presented. .... Citizenship, therefore, often delineates a hierarchy between and within social groups in society and consequently structures the opportunities afforded by the state to different people who are included, excluded or marginalized by the very definition of citizenship (Ben-Porat and Turner 2011, 7-8). Indeed, contemporary nation-states have had to address the realities of their increasingly multicultural, multinational and multireligious constituents. Far from their oft advertised culturally homogenous makeup, nation-states have had to face and accept new calls for recognition, rights and representation, often resulting in demands for a re-definition of state institutions and discourses surrounding citizenship (Ben-Porat and Turner 2011, 8–9). The multicultural aftermath of increased and multifaceted globalization (and the resulting rise of demands by new immigrant minority groups) therefore questions not only the “foundational assumptions of ‘ethnic states’ that provide a national home for a dominant ethnic group,�� but it also (re)shapes the contours of liberal-democratic institutions and discourse (Ben-Porat and Turner 2011, 9). Theorizing Citizenship Grounded in a guarantee of legal, social and political protections from other members of the commonwealth and arbitrary actions from a sovereign power, classical liberal citizenship is often understood as a passive and active membership of individuals in a nation-state with accompanying universalistic rights and responsibilities at a formally defined level of equality.2 Some of these characterizations of citizenship deserve attention. First, as membership in a nation-state, citizenship requires the identification of a certain personhood placed apart and in opposition to non-citizens, strangers and foreigners. Further, the distinction between passive rights of citizenhood and active abilities to contribute to and influence political and economic realities is important as both elements are necessary for genuine citizenship participation in a nation-state. Third, the universalistic character of citizenship rights is understood as for­mally enacted in law and equally applicable and accessible to all citizens. 2 Janoski and Gran 2002, 13–14. This definition is what the authors call ‘political citizenship’, but though they are focusing on the theoretical range of citizenship rights and obligations (legal, political, social, and participation rights) the discourse and theoretical premises of their depiction and definition of citizenship are very much in tune with a liberal theory of citizenship.