Cosmopolitan Political Thought

Cosmopolitan Political Thought asks the question of what it might mean for the very practices of political theorizing to be cosmopolitan. It suggests that such a vision of political theory is intimately linked to methodological questions about what is commonly called comparative political theory--namely, the turn beyond ideas and modes of inquiry determined by traditional Western scholarship. It is therefore an argument for applying the idea of cosmopolitanism--understood in a particular way--to the discipline of political theory itself. As Farah Godrej argues, there are four crucial components of this cosmopolitan intervention: the texts under analysis, the methods for interpreting non-Western texts and ideas, the application of these ideas across geographical and cultural boundaries, and the deconstruction of Eurocentrism. In order to be genuinely cosmopolitan, Godrej states, political theorists must reflect on their perspectives inside and outside various traditions and immerse themselves in foreign ideas, languages, histories, and cultures--ultimately relocating themselves within their disciplinary homes. The result will be a serious challenge to accepted solutions to political life.

Suggests that a cosmopolitan theory of political obligations involves extending these obligations beyond our own borders.

In a period of rapid internationalization of trade and increased labor mobility, is it relevant for nations to think about their moral obligations to others? Do national boundaries have fundamental moral significance, or do we have moral obligations to foreigners that are equal to our obligations to our compatriots? The latter position is known as cosmopolitanism, and this volume brings together a number of distinguished political philosophers and theorists to explore cosmopolitanism: what it consists in, and the positive case which can be made for it. Their essays provide a comprehensive overview of both the current state of the debate and the alternative visions of cosmopolitanism with which we can move forward, and they will interest a wide range of readers in philosophy, political theory, and law.

Cosmopolitan Political Thought asks the question of what it might mean for the very practices of political theorizing to be cosmopolitan. It suggests that such a vision of political theory is intimately linked to methodological questions about what is commonly called comparative political theory - namely, the turn beyond ideas and modes of inquiry determined by traditional Western scholarship. It is therefore an argument for applying the idea of cosmopolitanism - understood in a particular way - to the discipline of political theory itself. As Farah Godrej argues, there are four crucial components of this cosmopolitan intervention: the texts under analysis, the methods for interpreting non-Western texts and ideas, the application of these ideas across geographical and cultural boundaries, and the deconstruction of Eurocentrism. In order to be genuinely cosmopolitan, Godrej states, political theorists must reflect on their perspectives inside and outside various traditions and immerse themselves in foreign ideas, languages, histories, and cultures - ultimately relocating themselves within their disciplinary homes. The result will be a serious challenge to accepted solutions to political life.

This book offers a moral argument for world government, claiming that not only do we have strong obligations to people elsewhere, but that accountable integration among nation-states will help ensure all persons can lead a decent life.

Publisher Description

The cosmopolitan political tradition defines people not according to nationality, family, or class but as equally worthy citizens of the world. Martha Nussbaum pursues this “noble but flawed” vision, confronting its inherent tensions over material distribution, differential abilities, and the ideological conflicts inherent to pluralistic societies.

Globalization has been contested in recent times. Among the critical perspectives is cosmopolitanism. Yet, with the exception of normative theory, international relations as a field has ignored cosmopolitan thinking. This book redresses this gap and develops a dialogue between cosmopolitanism and international relations. The dialogue is structured around three debates between non-universalist theories of international relations and contemporary cosmopolitan thought. The theories chosen are realism, (post-)Marxism and postmodernism. All three criticize liberalism in the international domain, and, therefore, cosmopolitanism as an offshoot of liberalism. In the light of each school's respective critique of universalism, the book suggests both the importance and difficulty of the cosmopolitan perspective in the contemporary world. Beardsworth emphasizes the need for global leadership at nation-state level, re-embedding of the world economy, a cosmopolitan politics of the lesser violence, and cosmopolitan political judgement. He also suggests research agendas to situate further contemporary cosmopolitanism in international relations theory. This book will appeal to all students of political theory and international relations, especially those who are seeking more articulation of the main issues between cosmopolitanism and its critics in international relations.

Cosmopolitan conceptions of justice in global politics are gaining in importance in the field of international political theory. Cosmopolitanism claims that we owe duties of justice to all the persons of the world and thus that normative theories of global politics should focus first on the interests or welfare of persons rather than of states. Providing a thorough analysis of relevant literature and covering issues such as war and conflict, peace and human security, accountability for gross violations of human rights, environmental degradation, and the democratic deficit in transnational political actions and institutions, Patrick Hayden deftly examines the connections between accounts of cosmopolitanism and the part they play in contemporary global politics. He identifies competing theories of cosmopolitanism and defends them as strategies for serving the aims of justice in world affairs. Furthermore, he explores how cosmopolitan theories can function positively in processes of shaping international norms.

Gerard Delanty provides a comprehensive assessment of the idea of cosmopolitanism in social and political thought which links cosmopolitan theory with critical social theory. He argues that cosmopolitanism has a critical dimension which offers a solution to one of the weaknesses in the critical theory tradition: failure to respond to the challenges of globalization and intercultural communication. Critical cosmopolitanism, he proposes, is an approach that is not only relevant to social scientific analysis but also normatively grounded in a critical attitude. Delanty's argument for a critical, sociologically oriented cosmopolitanism aims to avoid, on the one hand, purely normative conceptions of cosmopolitanism and, on the other, approaches that reduce cosmopolitanism to the empirical expression of diversity. He attempts to take cosmopolitan theory beyond the largely Western context with which it has generally been associated, claiming that cosmopolitan analysis must now take into account non-Western expressions of cosmopolitanism.