Christian Joppke har nyligen avslutat den mycket intressanta akademiska debatten om medborgarskapstest som går att läsa på EUDO Citizenship. Drygt tio forskare, många av dem profilerade, har sagt sitt om hur ett liberalt medborgarskapstest bör utformas. Bland deras argumentation finner man en rad ståndpunkter som är intressanta för alla som vill ladda med argument inför en motsvarande svensk debatt.
I argued that, in principle, there is nothing objectionable to the new citizenship tests in Europe (even though I would not go as far as Amanda Koppenfels, who thinks they could turn Europe into US-style “countries of immigrants” –that’s a bit too much to expect of a trifle). The threshold of the illiberal is reached when (a) beliefs (and not just knowledge) are tested, but also when (b) behavioral virtuosity is imposed as condition for naturalization. Interestingly, no commentator said anything about (b), perhaps because the British concept of “active citizenship” is no requirement (yet?) and has not (yet?) been followed up elsewhere. Overall, I held, “the devil is in the detail”, and a context-sensitive analysis of the contents and modalities of citizenship tests is required to assess their “reasonableness” (the apposite term suggested by Randall Hansen in lieu of the overstretched “liberalism”).