In five pages the issue of dual citizenship is examined regarding the debate surrounding it but emphasizing its benefits as a helpful business or globalization tool. Six sources are cited in the bibliography.
Name of Research Paper File: CC6_KSdualCit.rtf
Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
dual citizenship expressed in the US in the last 100 years generally has been that of Theodore Roosevelt, who "called it a self-evident absurdity. That an individual may slice his
allegiance, as it were, between two sovereign nations is rather like supposing that polygamy is equivalent to monogamy for practical purposes" (West, 1998; p. 48).
In earlier days, all a naturalized American citizen had to do to lose his new American citizenship was to retain or renew legal nationality in another nation.
That attitude has been changing in the last half of the past century. Each side of the debate has been clearly stated; what is needed now is some middle
ground. The Vow "I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to
any foreign prince, potentate, state or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or a citizen, is the traditional oath taken by those being naturalized as
U.S. citizens" (West, 1998; p. 48). The purpose and the requirement for this statement was clear until we became such a nation of modern immigrants to the point that
the countrys demographics have changed in only the past decade. In the early days of massive immigration, those arriving from Europe literally in
the millions seemed to have little difficulty in assuming US citizenship, even though doing so required actively renouncing citizenship in the nation that had been the family ancestral homeland for
generations on end. The Germans, as example, retained their love for the country they loved while yet setting a course for a new life in a new nation.