Citizenship is undergoing transformation in tandem with the decentralization of technological and social processes. National political borders are being challenged by two parallel trends: the “golden visa” programs of the 2010s, where citizenship can be bought from nation-states, and the emergence of decentralized digital citizenship via blockchain, where citizenship can be purchased through network-based communities. Several critics argue that these systems create inequality by benefiting the wealthiest while excluding vulnerable groups. At the same time, this development highlights the potential for reshaping citizenship into a more inclusive and global tool to address issues such as climate change, migration, and welfare.

The end of history and the new future

Last year, Ivan Krastev, renowned as a “West-East expert,” and Yascha Mounk, founder of the liberal online magazine The Persuasion, held a conversation about the new global order. A key concept in their dialogue was the symbolic significance of 1989, when the political scientist Francis Fukuyama presented liberal values and ideals as “the end of history.” It was a highly interesting discussion between two liberal political theorists active in a debate marked by the rise of right-wing populism and authoritarian challenges, where issues of borders, identity, and migration have gained greater importance.

Krastev, among other things, describes how people in former communist states, such as Poland, met the changes of the 1990s with both hope and fear. Many experienced “the change” as a threat, feeling that identities and communities were at risk of dissolving. Therefore, Krastev argues that citizenship and national identity are not as easily or quickly transformed as consumer goods, such as clothes or food. But is that really still true in today's world?

Citizenship for Sale

During the 2010s, in particular, a new political phenomenon gained ground on a larger scale – the possibility of buying a new citizenship or residency. Within the EU, countries such as Malta, Cyprus, and Portugal have become known for their “golden visa” schemes, which offer citizenship or residence permits to investors in exchange for substantial financial contributions, often through investments in the real estate sector. This development recently came under scrutiny following a ruling by the Court of the EU, which concluded that Malta’s sale of citizenship violates EU law, as EU citizenship cannot be sold.

This trend has been strongly criticized, including in the book Debating Transformations of National Citizenship. The authors question, among other things, whether it is fair that the wealthiest can buy themselves new rights and freedoms? At the same time, the world's poorest are discriminated against and arbitrarily prevented from migrating due to systems that restrict their mobility and opportunities.

Yet this is only part of the story of the 2010s, which reflects contradictory trends and behaviors. While, for example, the Swedish government has adopted a stricter and more exclusionary tone regarding citizenship, technological advancements such as blockchain and cryptocurrencies have opened the door to decentralized citizenship. These digital networks, advocated by thinkers like right-libertarian Balaji Srinivasan, aim to create “network states” that are not bound by geographic borders but instead offer global communities where participants co-create the rules, including forms of “decentralized citizenship.”

Early stage and new solutions

Given technological progress, one could argue that politicians like Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson are speaking with outdated messages to voters who are nostalgic and collectivist. A passport is indeed more than a travel document, but in practice, we now live in a world where citizenship can, to a certain extent, be bought nearly as easily as taking a 20-minute trip to a shopping mall for food and drink. At the same time, decentralized citizenship is often expensive and accessible primarily to the wealthier and more privileged individuals of the “creative class.”

Still, there is hope that these new forms of citizenship highlight the need to rethink how we organize society from local to global levels. They may instead be “glocal”—rooted in their local contexts but also fully engaged in global communities. One can envision a future where citizenship is not just a matter of rights and belonging, but also a means of addressing global challenges through broader cooperation on issues such as climate change, migration, and welfare.

Thanks for reading. Please follow my blog, write your feedback, and support my writing.