Idea historian J.H.A. Pocock observed how the characteristics of Greek and Roman citizenship in the classical period serve as conceptual standards for understanding modern citizenship. In the Greek model, especially in Athens in the 4th and 5th centuries BC, the equality of citizens as legislators is a key aspect. In contrast, the imperial Roman model emphasized the equal status of citizens before the law. Thus, equality of participation and equality before the law have inspired several theories of citizenship in the Western tradition. Both ideas also took shape in the construction of modern democratic citizenship. Constitutional democracies emphasize both the means of participation in the realization of the common good and the protection of the fundamental rights of individuals and minorities. Political analyst Sidney Verba says current civic activism includes voting, protesting, presenting ideas, participation, financial support and campaigning for candidates for public office. The current citizenship model presents three clear preconditions: 1) participation opportunities; 2) personal motivation; 3) resources of time, money, relational networks.

However, this conceptual framework of political theory helps to clarify only a fraction of contemporary Brazilian citizenship. Since the adoption of the 1988 Constitution, fundamental rights have been formally guaranteed. And as can be seen from the daily life of Brazil, the motivation, interest, relationships, financial and time resources available from several Brazilians, as well as the constant and imaginary manifestation of their political ideas, are undeniable. On the other hand, there is an increase in harshness, aggressiveness, disrespect, verbal and physical violence associated with the manifestation of citizenship. How to explain this impoliteness and intolerance among various political groups? Why are basic citizenship standards insufficient to create a less aggressive political environment in Brazil?

We can point to at least one aspect of citizenship, even more elementary than those mentioned above, that is not perceived in Brazil: the ethical and solidarity prerequisites that the concept of citizenship requires. Both classical and modern theories of citizenship imply some degree of solidarity and reciprocity between citizens. Members of the political community must see each other as equal partners in collective efforts to coexist. Any concept of citizenship requires a minimal concept of “city”, that is, community. Thus, those groups and individuals who persist in fanatical political activism aimed at facilitating the attack and destruction of the opposing political group rebel against the most elementary line of citizenship: the ethics of brotherhood. Anyone who does not recognize a brother in another at some level does not feel responsible for him at any level. In the past, Rui Barbosa has observed that many Brazilians live by the “Law of Cain”: a law that rejects all laws. Without a minimum fraternity, there can be no citizenship. In the words of Denis Diderot: “From fanaticism to barbarism, no more than one step.”

* Davi Lago is a researcher in the Policy, Behavior and Media Laboratory of the São Paulo Foundation.