Individual Values and Cosmopolitan Allegiance
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
EJT0010.1177/1354066114541879European Journal of International RelationsBayram 541879research-article2014 E IR Article J European Journal of International Relations What drives modern 2015, Vol. 21(2) 451 –479 © The Author(s) 2014 Diogenes? Individual values and Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav cosmopolitan allegiance DOI: 10.1177/1354066114541879 ejt.sagepub.com A. Burcu Bayram The University of Texas at Arlington, USA Abstract Why do some individuals see themselves as world citizens? A significant number of individuals around the world view themselves as world citizens. This is a curious phenomenon that merits attention. Yet despite a growing body of work on cosmopolitanism, the literature lacks a clear explanation of what moves individuals to see themselves as citizens of the world. This article explicates the psychological underpinnings of cosmopolitan allegiance by bringing in personal values. Multinomial logistic regression analysis using World Values Survey data (2005–2008) shows that self-transcendence, self-enhancement (except power), and openness-to-change values as defined by the Schwartz Value Theory lead to cosmopolitan allegiance, while conservation values hinder this attachment. This finding indicates that world citizenship on the ground is a multifaceted role attractive to individuals with varied outlooks on life. In people’s perceptions, world citizenship is congruent with morality, diversity, and liberty as well as with self-interest. By offering a psychological account of cosmopolitan allegiance, this study adds the missing micro-foundations to macro theories of cosmopolitanism and provides the needed empirical evidence. By illuminating what drives contemporary world citizens, this research contributes to a richer understanding of the bottom-up cosmopolitanism crucial for democratic and efficacious global governance. Keywords Cosmopolitan allegiance, cosmopolitan, personal values, Schwartz Value Theory, world citizenship, World Values Survey Corresponding author: A. Burcu Bayram, Assistant Professor of Political Science, Department of Political Science, The University of Texas at Arlington, 601. S. Nedderman Drive, 206 University Hall, Arlington, TX, 76019, USA. Email: [email protected] 452 European Journal of International Relations 21(2) Introduction Why do some individuals view themselves as citizens of the world? According to the 2005–2008 wave of the World Values Survey (WVS) carried out in 57 countries across the world, over 30% of the 65,269 respondents strongly identify as world citizens. This is an important phenomenon that merits attention. The term ‘cosmopolitan’ derives from the Greek word kosmopolitês, meaning citizen of the world (Miller, 2010). When asked where he was from, Diogenes the Cynic responded that he was ‘a citizen of the world.’ World citizenship anchors the very project of cosmopolitanism. Moral, legal, and politi- cal commitments of cosmopolitanism are tied to this very allegiance. Thus, it is crucial to analyze what drives the current generation of Diogenes. Yet despite a growing body of work on cosmopolitanism, the literature lacks a clear explanation of what moves individuals to see themselves as world citizens. Partly responsible for this lacuna is the normative and abstract nature of the cosmopolitanism scholarship. Theoretical works have examined the moral principles of cosmopolitan- ism (Dallmayr, 2003; Nussbaum, 1996; Waldron, 2010), the possibility of cosmopoli- tan justice (Beitz, 2005; Caney, 2008; O’Neill, 2000), and the compatibility between cosmopolitanism and nationalism (Bowden, 2003; Nussbaum, 1996; Rorty, 1994).1 Different aspects of cosmopolitan democracy have also been explored (Archibugi, 2004; Cochran, 2002; Franceschet, 2000; Held, 1999; Koenig-Archibugi, 2011). Yet scholars have paid insufficient attention to what makes individuals identify as world citizens in practice. Only a handful of empirical studies have analyzed cosmopolitanism at the individual level. Scholars have examined the correlates of a general cosmopolitan orientation (Norris, 2000; Norris and Inglehart, 2009), transnational identities (Jung, 2008; Pichler, 2012), and cosmopolitan support for international institutions (Ecker-Ehrhardt, 2012). In the field of International Relations (IR), studies on foreign policy dispositions have established that cooperative internationalism marked by a cosmopolitan sense of obligation toward the wider international community is an important dimension structuring mass and elite atti- tudes toward international politics (Chittick, Billingsley, and Travis, 1995; Holsti and Rosenau, 1988; Nincic and Ramos, 2010; Rathbun, 2007; Wittkopf, 1990). Despite important progress, however, a satisfying account of what drives individuals to see themselves as world citizens still eludes us. Cosmopolitan allegiance and a series of cosmopolitan orientations such as positive feelings toward immigrants and a weak sense of nationalism are often lumped together (Norris, 2000; Schueth and O’Loughlin, 2008). Scholars have argued that younger people are more likely to be cosmopolitan (Jung, 2008; Norris, 2000). Although important, by itself, age does not fully explain why individuals identify as world citizens in the first place. IR scholars have examined how a cosmopolitan posture informs individuals’ foreign policy preferences, yet little has been done to uncover the origins of this posture. In sum, our understanding of cosmopolitan allegiance remains limited. This is a critical void for three main reasons. Cosmopolitan allegiance taps a person’s self-view as a world citizen. This is a voluntary attachment. Unlike socially ascribed ones, this attachment implies a choice (Huddy, 2001; Thoits, 2003). What underlies this self-understanding is not immediately obvious. The world community is ill-suited to Bayram 453 offering feelings of stability, security, or positive distinctiveness, factors found to drive psychological group membership (Brewer, 1991; Castano et al., 2002; Hogg and Abrams, 1993). Therefore, the question of cosmopolitan allegiance begs an answer. Second, world citizenship implicates important political and normative debates about the global order. It is well known that identity generates mass support for political sys- tems. The cosmopolitan order is no exception. A democratic and efficacious cosmopoli- tan order requires some sense of world citizenship at the mass level (Calhoun, 2007; Ecker-Ehrhardt, 2012; Kuper, 2004; Urbinati, 2003). Empirical evidence supports this intuition. IR scholars have found that a cosmopolitan foreign policy orientation increases support for peaceful conflict resolution, multilateral diplomacy, and international institu- tions (Chittick et al., 1995; Herrmann and Keller, 2004; Herrmann et al., 1999; Hurwitz and Peffley, 1987; Nincic and Ramos, 2010). Since cosmopolitan allegiance constitutes the backbone of bottom-up cosmopolitanism, understanding the origins of people’s sense of world citizenship is crucial. The third and final consideration is a normative one. The individual is the chief unit of moral concern in the cosmopolitan project (Brown and Held, 2010b; Pogge, 1992). For a richer account of cosmopolitanism, it should also be the main unit of theoretical and empirical analysis. Those aware of the importance of this matter have urged scholars to investigate the ‘cosmopolitan condition of real people’ (Beck and Sznaider, 2006: 9). This research takes on this task. In this article, I analyze the psychological logic of cosmopolitan allegiance by bring- ing in individual values. Macro theories of cosmopolitanism routinely rely on micro- assumptions about world citizens. In particular, existing approaches characterize world citizenship as the manifestation of specific human motives. World citizens are other- regarding humanitarians in normative accounts (Brown and Held, 2010b; Nussbaum, 1996), self-interested elites in critical economic models (Micklethwait and Wooldridge, 2000), open-minded multiculturalists in cultural ones (Hannerz, 1990; Skrbis Kendall and Woodward, 2004), and autonomy-seeking free agents according to liberal perspectives (Bohman, 2007; Delanty, 2006).2 Uncovering the psychological dynamics of cosmopoli- tan allegiance, therefore, requires tapping into individuals’ core motives. Values offer one viable means of exploring human motivation. Values are cognitive representations of trans-situational motivational goals that function as reference points for individuals (Rokeach, 1973; Schwartz, 1992). The distinctiveness of values is that they operate at a higher and general level of cognition, are stable across different situations, and serve as evaluative standards. As Rohan (2000: 258) explains, a value is a higher- order ‘meaning-producing cognitive structure.’ Therefore, values are analytically prior to attitudes, preferences, and roles, and thus inform the latter (Feldman, 2003; Roccas et al., 2002; Rohan, 2000; Schwartz, 1992). Specifically, as guiding principles in people’s lives, values influence which roles people find appealing. Individuals take on attachments that are congruent with their value priorities (Feather, 1994; Hitlin, 2003, 2007). To illuminate the psychological underpinnings of cosmopolitan allegiance, I apply the theory of personal values identified by Shalom Schwartz and derive testable hypotheses. Schwartz’s theory is considered to be the most systematic theory of individual values (Feldman, 2003; Hitlin and Piliavin, 2004; Rohan, 2000). The structure of