sign in sign up
<<
Home , Cosmopolitanism, Dogma

Cosmopolitan Disorders: Ignoring Power, Overcoming Diversity, Transcending Borders

Everita SILINA* Abstract Globalisation

The Cosmopolitan discourse on global The discourse on governance invokes a global, normative ethic. tends to dissociate time and space. Based It presumes a kind of shared civic identity that ignores the burdens of history, obstacles on broadly Cosmopolitan , it of geography and diversity of peoples, uniting invokes a global normative ethic, a kind all under a set of identifiable global problems. of shared civic identity, that ignores the Critical scholars have moved away from such burdens of history, obstacles of geography by advancing their own brand of and the diversity of peoples, uniting Cosmopolitan ethic, one anchored in a spatially all under a set of identifiable global limited and bottom-up definition of the good life. Yet critical scholars continue to emphasise problems. Despite the proliferation of agency, underplaying the structured Cosmopolitan arguments and models nature of global inequalities. Consequently, of governance, it is not an easy task to they reinforce, rather than challenge, the present a succinct account of current current global order. I consider the implications Cosmopolitan theory. Every single text of these models of for issues of power, identity and agency. Any approach on Cosmopolitanism starts with an to global governance, I argue, must begin by observation or recantation that there is analysing the relationship between identity and nothing resembling a consensus regarding (in)security. “what constitutes Cosmopolitanism, who can be described as Cosmopolitan Key Words or where Cosmopolitanism is to be found”.1 And no less than a dozen Cosmopolitanism, , critical strands of Cosmopolitanism exist.2 In cosmopolitanism, global governance, what follows, I focus on the dominant identity, power, security. approaches to Cosmopolitanism and their critical alternatives. At its core, Cosmopolitanism * Assistant Professor of International Relations, that all people have equal worth and The New School University, . dignity as members of a common

25 PERCEPTIONS, Spring 2014, Volume XIX, Number 1, pp. 25-38. Everita Silina

family. This commitment to the bond of under the rule of a Cosmopolitan law”.5 shared humanity leads Cosmopolitans to Kant saw the emergence of such an order call into question the moral significance as a natural progression of history, an of national (or any ) borders expression of “the fundamentally moral and identities attached to them. At nature of humanity”.6 He perceived the best, territorial boundaries have only interactions between states to be driven derivative value.3 The argument is traced by the same “state of nature” logic for back to the Greek Stoics and Cynics which Hobbes had argued the necessity who are credited with coining the term- of a in the domestic Cosmopolitan- to describe their new sphere. All states would strike a global identity that transcends the boundaries social contract, Kant extrapolated, of the polis to embrace the , the voluntarily entering into a binding only true . According to agreement to limit their sovereignty , the Stoics believed that and power. A global civil would “[e]ach person lives in a local community buttress from below and Cosmopolitan and in a wider community of human international law from above. The result ideals, aspirations, and arguments”. would be nothing less than an end to all Of these, humanity is the only moral wars.7 identity and association, the former Kant’s recommendations seem 4 being merely an accident of birth. particularly relevant in an era of rapid globalisation and the perceived decline The exaggerated role assigned to of the state. Eşref Aksu sees Kant’s writings on “perpetual ” as laying Europe, and now its institutional the conceptual ground for the current progeny, the European Union theorising on various global governance (EU), does not advance arrangements, both in their normative the impartiality claims of and institutional guises.8 Kant’s Cosmopolitans. in the principles of and his emphasis on global consciousness and understanding appeal to many who seek More recently, Cosmopolitans have “novel” solutions for “inter-cultural” taken inspiration from the writings of problems in a post 9-11 world. Kant the 18th-century German philosopher, understood that a better international . He proposed the order could not rely on international idea of a global and an law alone. Its success required the right international order composed of attitudes and dispositions. Reason would republics or “operating be a way to escape from “ and

26 Ignoring Power, Overcoming Diversity, Transcending Borders unvindicated authority”.9 According to is a moral perspective that is impartial, Kant, only impartial reasoning could universal, individualist, and egalitarian”.14 foster a productive dialogue and mutual Much like Liberalism, Kantian understanding. Human ability to reason Cosmopolitanism aims to reconcile (and bestows on us a Cosmopolitan right. promote) liberal notions of This means that an individual has “the with and respect capacity to present oneself and be heard for value pluralism. In ’s within and across political ; recent interpretation, Cosmopolitanism ... the right to enter dialogue without differs from and / artificial constraint and delimitation”.10 universalism in that “[i]t neither orders Presumably, Kant believed that this differences hierarchically nor dissolves open-ended communication would them, but accepts them as such, indeed lead to more worldly attitudes and the invests them with a positive value”.15 identity of a world citizen. Cosmopolitanism perceives “others as differentand at the same time as equal”;16 it dismisses “either/or” conjunctions and When borders seem less permits a “both/and” to operate, permanent and technological embracing the “unity in diversity” developments in commu- outlook of liberal pluralism. Quite nications allow millions around simply, nothing in Cosmopolitanism’s the world to connect easily, core tenets or its multiple incarnations distance and separation (or even conflicts with the liberal agenda and its isolation) lose their power to principles. But, as I argue, this means divide and alienate. Cosmopolitanism suffers from all the same dilemmas and criticisms- and more!- that afflict Liberalism. Indeed, Kant’s argument is echoed in John Liberalism’s dilemmas now drive a wedge Rawls’s The Law of Peoples.11 Though among Cosmopolitans. When the clash the book contributes poorly to the between local and global cannot debate and remains woefully out of be avoided, Cosmopolitans divide into touch with a rapidly changing world,12 two separate camps, each privileging what remains important, particularly in one level of association over the other. Rawls’ definition of as fairness, While Liberalism has tried to negotiate is the intimate connection between the divergent pulls of individual and Cosmopolitanism and Liberalism, group identities, Cosmopolitanism specifically the American brand.13 has for the most part abandoned any Charles Jones notes: “Cosmopolitanism attempt to understand the nature of

27 Everita Silina

identity. Nor are Cosmopolitans able male) influenced by many cultures and to escape the accusation that a common committed to none. He is a child of the human of individualised and modern era of mobility and unlimited -bearing citizens is just another choice in everything from what one hegemonic attempt to impose the wears to who one is and what identity values of a particular culture and one creates. He is a traveller, a global society onto the rest of the world. The tourist and a connoisseur of all the exaggerated role assigned to Europe, diverse that the world has and now its institutional progeny, to offer. An essential characteristic of a the European Union (EU), does not Cosmopolitan is his open orientation to advance the impartiality claims of the rich cultural tapestry of humanity. Cosmopolitans. Finally, like Liberalism, Along with this liberal attitude comes the Cosmopolitanism suffers from an under- sense that he is equally at home anywhere theorised notion of power, especially in the world. No place or community through economic interest. Therefore, claims special and permanent loyalty Cosmopolitanism responds weakly to the from him. In this sense, a Cosmopolitan rapid integration of global markets and is a figure who is typically associated the spread of a corporate homogenised with “the comfortable culture of middle- culture that poses a threat to any notion class travellers, intellectuals and business of diversity. people”.17 In short, both Liberalism and Many emphasise the of Cosmopolitanism ignore structural Cosmopolitanism in a globalising world inequalities and their effect on order. When borders seem less permanent and identities. Consequently, they and technological developments in tend to reinforce rather than challenge communications allow millions around the dominant power imbalance in the the world to connect easily, distance global order. Any approach to global and separation (or even isolation) lose governance, I argue, must begin by their power to divide and alienate. A analysing the relationship between resulting physical and virtual mobility identity and (in)security. means that cultural interactions are more frequent, leading to hybridisation, Cosmopolitanism exchange and understanding. Most students of globalisation assume that Cosmopolitanism reflects, above the growing interconnectivity among all else, a frame of mind. In historic different groups of people results in more accounts, a Cosmopolitan is often frequent dialogue, which grants greater portrayed as a worldly person (usually access to alternative perspectives. This

28 Ignoring Power, Overcoming Diversity, Transcending Borders inter-subjective exchange of meaning significant; local ones, as Nussbaum figures essentially in the formation argues, are nonessential. This, in turn, of empathy and understanding. They leads to the claim that local identities agree with Cosmopolitan authors cannot and should not take priority like who “celebrate over broader human loyalties. Our co- hybridity, impurity, intermingling, the nationals, therefore, do not have any transformation that comes of new and extra-claims on our allegiance, loyalty unexpected combinations of human or assistance. Local attachments and beings, cultures, ideas, politics, movies, conflicts suggest a return to barbarism. songs”; they “rejoice in mongrelization Hence, to the extent that Cosmopolitans and fear the absolutism of the Pure. are interested in identity at all, it is to Mélange, hotchpotch, a bit of this and overcome these limits. a bit of that is how newness enters the Thin Cosmopolitans object to world. It is the greatest possibility that such unflinching impartiality and 18 mass migration gives the world…”. universalistic identity formation. Cosmopolitans believe that mere Some point out that our attachments exposure to other cultures and ways of are parochial and grow outward. In being is sufficient to nudge one towards embracing universal affiliation, we risk a Cosmopolitan identity. A journey “[ending] up nowhere- feeling at home has a transformative effect of turning a neither at home nor in the world”.19 traveller into a thoughtful and reflexive Or as Heidegger observed, “the frantic world citizen. abolition of all distance brings no nearness”.20 Nor is it clear that embracing An insight clearly lacking from a conceptually borderless world, where local identities are considered shameful Cosmopolitan arguments is and backwards, will lead to anything a recognition that identity is other than utter alienation. As many inextricably linked to a sense of cultural critics have observed, we already security. lead very individualised lives.21 The expansion of globally has granted many the freedom of a rights- Nonetheless, identity remains an bearing individual; the spread of global unsettled topic for most Cosmopolitans. markets has further unravelled our There is little agreement on a moral connections to various communities, ordering of different levels of identity. including familial ties. The growth Thick Cosmopolitans believe that only of these global markets certainly has global identities are valuable, moral and not led towards any common sense

29 Everita Silina

of responsibility among Cosmopolitans fail to recognise that actors. In fact, some would argue that material considerations and context the marketisation of all human spheres perforate cultural interactions. Culture has diminished the power of all appeals is intimately connected to materiality. to a common identity, however broadly Here, most Cosmopolitan thinkers are imagined. “Intimacy”, Martin Jacques unable or unwilling to reflect critically on has argued, “is a function of time and their own social status in local, regional permanence”.22 Deep loyalties cannot and global contexts. As Sypnowich simply be engineered and the breaking recognises, the Cosmopolitan stance down of borders that separate us may is one of inequality vis-à-vis the rest not generate any positive feelings of the human community. “[T]he among us. Intimacy “rests on mutuality Cosmopolitan is typically a privileged and unconditionality. It is rooted in person, who has access to foreign travel, trust. As such, it is the antithesis of some of art and the means for the values engendered by the market”. enjoying it, who possesses sophisticated If he is correct that “[w]e live in an tastes and a cultivated, open mind”.24 ego-market society”, how can we The relatively privileged position of generate the necessary commitment most academics in Western democracies to human flourishing implied in thick makes them natural allies and advocates Cosmopolitanism? Nussbaum and of the Cosmopolitan ethic. It is puzzling other thick Cosmopolitans presume that that the very people who write about a moral arguments alone can establish a Cosmopolitan ethic for everyone else sense of commitment and care for the are unable to reflect on their own social, well-being of others that usually exists economic and cultural embeddedness between members of small communities. and recognise that “those who express But as Jacques points out, although mistrust of Cosmopolitanism, however “[o]ur relationships may be more bigoted and pernicious their views, might Cosmopolitan… they are increasingly well be giving expression to a resentment transient and ephemeral”.23 of cultural inequality that is spawned by material inequality”.25 Hence, an insight Despite the rhetoric in favour of clearly lacking from Cosmopolitan global regimes, at the moment arguments is a recognition that identity states are the only political is inextricably linked to a sense of structures that can mitigate the security. A Cosmopolitan identity devastating externalities of the owes much to the sense of security and global market. permanence provided by the socio- economic and cultural support systems

30 Ignoring Power, Overcoming Diversity, Transcending Borders that allow to venture beyond cause. Human rights enforcement and the immediate and the familiar. universal legal principles such as R2P 28 Note, for example, America’s economic depend entirely on state enforcement. dominance. Not only does it mean that Similar observations can be made about the world’s wealth is unevenly distributed the state’s role in social redistribution. but it also normalises the vulnerability Despite the rhetoric in favour of global of cultural practices in underdeveloped regimes, at the moment states are countries to the behemoth of Western the only political structures that can consumerism.26 While Appiah is willing mitigate the devastating externalities of to concede the overwhelming presence the global market. Finally, by directing of American pop culture in remote all their critiques against the - corners of the world, without a theory state, Cosmopolitans underestimate the of global economic order he is unable to structural role played by other forces link the presence of American goods and in shaping the international order. Tara the influence of American practices to McCormack underscores that much of any clear power inequalities.27 The most the critical agenda has become part of he can concede is that the US benefits the mainstream with global norms like from its sheer size and economies of scale the R2P enshrined at the highest level of 29 and that more open trade is good. global governance organisations. This limited understanding of structures and actors that wield power in Cultural/Critical the global order betrays an equally limited Cosmopolitanism notion of power. Cosmopolitanism, like Liberalism, tends to equate power and In contrast, Boon and Delanty see coercive force with the direct power of Europe, for example, as a dynamic the state. Most Cosmopolitan thinkers space.30 It cannot be reduced either to perceive the state as an embodiment European nation-states or equated with of all that is wrong with the current some broader global mission. Instead, world order. Yet, the focus on the state Europeanisation is something much as the main culprit of the 21st century is more multi-layered and polycentric. unfortunate. It tends to equate all major It relates simultaneously to local and problems associated with modern society global elements, it exists “both within with the rise of the nation-state. Hence, and beyond the boundaries of the nation they find themselves in an uncomfortable state”.31 To them, Europe represents “a situation of having to argue against the newly emerging social reality”, criss- only viable actor that can put into effect crossing discourses and identities and the very policies dear to the Cosmopolitan giving rise to various socio-cognitive

31 Everita Silina

transformations.32 Rather than the outside of our affiliations”.36 They undermining national identities and agree with Beck and Grande that most eroding the foundations of nation states, dichotomies no longer usefully mark “Europeanisation” involves a cultural understandings of the fluidity of the logic of self-transformation. This “self- current epoch. We must adopt a new reflexive development of one’s social, frame of analysis: border thinking. “In the cultural and political ” is context of Europe, border thinking (or a learning process that might lead to the upsurge of polyvocality) amounts to self-transformation.33 In other words, an increasing awareness of the vacillation through the process of Europeanisation, of borders- of the vaporization [emphasis Europeans are learning that identities added] of old established ”.37 are not stable or fixed but are always This radical leads us to changing and adapting and are called realise that we, too, are borders “in that 38 into question by the transformation we are not quite this nor quite that”. process itself. Indeed, even Europe itself According to Boon and Delanty, the loss has no substantive cultural or social of is positive for it constitutes identity, since its subjectivity too is an a new discursive space, allowing us to 39 ambivalent concept.34 The new post- embrace more communicative logic. national belonging is an empowering Similarly, Chris Rumford offers a development for in recognising the concept of “Critical Cosmopolitanism”. fluid and open-ended nature of identity To Rumford, Europe presents an and borders, it gives force to those excellent counter-hegemonic discourse categories disadvantaged by the concept to globalisation. Like Boon and of territorial citizenship-migrants and Delanty, Rumford conceives of Europe ethnic minorities.35 as a fluid space, a borderland, where different borders are constantly being reconstituted by different actors and Without a proper accounting of increasingly by citizens themselves.40 power and the nature of politics, Similarly, Rumford sees this process dialogical Cosmopolitanism of Europe’s Cosmopolitanisation as an remains an academic distraction emancipatory project: that is, a release only. from the narrow constraints of and national belonging. But this cultural interpretation Finally, Boon and Delanty see lacks any notion of structural power. Europeanisation as springing forth from Emancipation thus does not envision creative tensions between “the inside and freedom from the constraints of the

32 Ignoring Power, Overcoming Diversity, Transcending Borders neo-liberal economic order or those universalism; in fact, it might lead to imposed by poverty and inequality. psychological developments that are Cultural/Critical Cosmopolitans do not more dangerous and destructive of all see in migrants economic actors fleeing genuine political life than is remoteness destitution. For Cultural Cosmopolitans, induced by moral Cosmopolitanism. these represent only challenges to the Hence, while cultural Cosmopolitans rigid territoriality and identity resulting embrace radical uncertainty and from the nation-state system. celebrate increasing insecurity, they fail to consider the possibility that these states of being are not compatible with In Greece, the electoral showing any stable notion of the self. The embrace of Golden Dawn bluntly of insecurity and uncertainty advocated reminds us of how, under the by Critical Cosmopolitans may produce right conditions, even the crudest the toxic localism that they seek to forms of xenophobic nationalism overcome. The rise of the Golden Dawn can seem a “progressive” party in Greece, for example, cannot lead us to such a sanguine position on alternative to the Liberalism of radical uncertainty.41 Furthermore, none an integrated EU. of these discussions distinguish between a process of Europeanisation that is In this way, Cultural/Critical freely chosen and one that is so clearly Cosmopolitanism fails to engage with imposed by other forces and actors. the very categories it seeks to undermine Hence, while some might celebrate with its critical perspective. Culture, “hybrid identities”, many have no choice identity, belonging and territoriality in the matter. The latter’s (borders) all form the core of cultural with European transformation has been arguments, yet none of the writers and remains highly disempowering. contributing to the debate offer a clear Finally, as an analytic, Cultural/Critical genealogy of these essential concepts. Cosmopolitanism is short on praxis. At Boon and Delanty recognise that times, it appears to be of no immediate Nussbaum’s radical critique of local import beyond academic musings. The attachments is problematic for our emphasis on dialogical Cosmopolitanism ideas of political mobilisation but they and global discourse communities proceed, similarly, with a claim that we contributes usefully to a debate on the have no stable identities left. This chronic nature of in post-national uncertainty seems not very different in its world but a practical import remains political implications from Nussbaum’s missing. As Duncan Kelly says, while

33 Everita Silina

such conversations are crucial, “Politics right parties are making steady inroads as endless conversation… ultimately in the core countries of the EU and are leads to a neutered discussion”.42 forming alliances across state boundaries Without a proper accounting of power to solidify their appeal and political and the nature of politics, dialogical muscle. In Greece, the electoral showing Cosmopolitanism remains an academic of Golden Dawn bluntly reminds us of distraction only. how, under the right conditions, even the crudest forms of xenophobic nationalism Conclusion can seem a “progressive” alternative to the Liberalism of an integrated EU. As Gideon Ranchman notes, “[t]he Cosmopolitan models for all their idea that the European Union might variety do not engage with these realities represent the culmination of world and do not offer a workable answer for history is depressing”.43 Certainly, the forms of governance that could offer today’s debates in Europe, about how to a chance for a different future. Even deal with the crises in Greece and Spain, critical versions of Cosmopolitanism who is responsible for the euro’s poor remain stubbornly uninterested in the performance and the lack of economic enormous structural power exercised by growth, and the proper relationship with the global economy and its agents. Europe’s internal Others, should leave As I have argued throughout, most of any Cosmopolitan dispirited. All these the problems faced by Cosmopolitan debates are necessary and significant. models of global governance are But contrary to Beck’s assessment, they imported directly from its theoretical do not constitute a critically engaged and foundation in Liberalism. At its core, reflexive . The proposals Cosmopolitanism seeks to identify a that have been adopted for various common first principle of co-existence economic solutions signal a return to upon which to build the institutional pre-crisis austerity measures and an framework to resolve thorny issues such overall neoliberal agenda. This is hardly as “the criteria of inclusion/exclusion, the a hallmark of critical engagement with nature of the society/community to be the problems that caused the crisis in the governed, and the similarity of interests/ first place. Inability to address societal principles of the subjects of governance”.44 fears about the economic situation has Like Liberalism, Cosmopolitanism’s certainly contributed to the rise of far- emphasis on individual agency focuses right parties and attitudes that a few on the power that constrains individual decades ago would have existed mostly choice (including the choice of identity), on the fringes of society. Today, far- through the coercive power of the state.

34 Ignoring Power, Overcoming Diversity, Transcending Borders

Most Cosmopolitans, therefore, have a the bodies are piling up, the only rational difficult time recognising the insecurities choice is to retreat to one’s identity group created by economic and financial even where strong cross-community globalisation. Indeed, free trade and the ties had existed prior to the conflict. market are typically listed among the core The relationship between identity and values to be embraced by Cosmopolitan security provides crucial insight into commitments. the nature of societal relations and their breakdown and caution us against over The emphasis on consensus, too emphasis on flexibility and uncertainty in the formation of self-understanding. often hides the fact that there Indeed, emphasis on the fluid nature are clear winners and losers in a of identity can lead to a great sense of globally integrated order. ontological insecurity as person’s stable sense of self is eroded. This in turn can Yet ironically, Cosmopolitans and lead to a retreat into a more rigid identity. Liberals overlook human agency. Most We cannot reduce politics to a game people in most societies cannot, in fact, of catch-up and a rubber stamp for the choose among competing visions of reality “naturalised” economic order. Much and future. Despite the platitudes that we of what passes for vigorous accounts of get from Cosmopolitan writers, choice analytic thinking in today’s literature has little to do with how globalisation on global governance is plagued by an is perceived and how it appears in odd revulsion for all things political. people’s lives. What happens to identity Cosmopolitans argue against the very communities under the stress of a violent notion of power or interest-based conflict provides a quick glimpse into politics. They see the post-modern era as the nature of the relationship between a dawn of a new, more conciliatory, more identity and insecurity that might be benign, less violent and less contentious instructive. What we see in Darfur, politics based on mutual recognition of former Yugoslavia, and again in Syria, universal commonalities and a consensus is an increased pre-eminence of identity culture. The emphasis on consensus, ties as insecurity increases. In Sudan, however, too often hides the fact that even prior to the onset of the Darfur there are clear winners and losers in a crisis, “a half-century of brutal military globally integrated order. A truly critical confrontation has sharpened the place approach to the problem of cross-cultural of race and in the conflicts”.45 engagement would recognise that we As the citizens of Sarajevo found out in need secure foundations to engage each 1995, once the bullets start flying and other as equals.

35 Everita Silina

Endnotes

1 Chris Rumford, “Globalisation: Cosmopolitanism and Europe”, in Chris Rumford (ed.), Cosmopolitanism and Europe, Liverpool, Liverpool University Press, 2007, p. 1.

2 Here is a small sample of variety of Cosmopolitanisms occupying the debate in the current literature: Kantian legal Cosmopolitanism, moral, cultural, civic, rooted, methodological, democratic, realist (or Cosmopolitan realism), populist, actual existing, “cool”, critical, new, capitalist, thin (or weak), thick (or strong), layered, “dialogic”, “distributive”, embedded and embodied, impartialist, aesthetic, institutional Cosmopolitanism, “cosmo-lite” and even “Cosmopolitanisation”. Ulrich Beck and Edgar Grande, Cosmopolitan Europe, translated by Ciaran Cronin, Cambridge, London, Polity, 2007; Gillian Brock and Harry Brighouse, “Globalisation”, in Gilian Brock and Harry Brighouse (eds.), The of Cosmopolitanism, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2005; David Held, “Principles of Cosmopolitan Order”, in Brock and Brighouse (eds.), The Political Philosophy of Cosmopolitanism; Andrew Dobson, “Thick Cosmopolitanism”, Political Studies, Vol. 54, No. 1 (March 2006), p. 165-184; Nigel Harris, The Return of Cosmopolitan Capital: Globalisation, the State and War, London, I.B. Taurus, 2003; Vivienne Boon and Gerard Delanty, “Cosmopolitanism and Europe: Considerations and Contemporary Approaches”, in Rumford (ed.), Cosmopolitanism and Europe; Eleonore Kofman, “Figures of the Cosmopolitan: Privileged Nationals and National Outsiders”, in Rumford (ed.), Cosmopolitanism and Europe; Chris Rumford, Cosmopolitan Spaces: Europe, , Theory, New York, Routledge, 2008.

3 Brock and Brighouse (eds.), The Political Philosophy of Cosmopolitanism, p. ix.

4 Held, “Principles of Cosmopolitan Order”, p. 10.

5 Immanuel Kant, “Idea for a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Intent”, in Perpetual Peace and Other , Indianapolis, Hackett, 1784; Immanuel Kant, “To Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch”, in Perpetual Peace and Other Essays, Indianapolis, Hackett, 1795. Both cited in Anthony McGrew, “Democracy beyond Borders?”, in David Held and Anthony McGrew (eds.), The Global Transformation Reader, Cambridge, Polity Press, 2000, p. 413.

6 Boon and Delanty, “Cosmopolitanism and Europe”, p. 21.

7 Ibid.

8 Eşref Aksu, Early Notions of Global Governance: Selected Eighteenth-Century Proposals for “Perpetual Peace” – with Rousseau, Bentham and Kant unabridged, Cardiff, University of Wales Press, 2008, pp. 1-11.

36 Ignoring Power, Overcoming Diversity, Transcending Borders

9 Held, “Principles of Cosmopolitan Order”, p. 11. 10 Ibid. 11 See for example essays in Gilian Brock and Harry Brighouse (eds.), The Political Philosophy of Cosmopolitanism. 12 , The Law of Peoples: with “The Idea of Public Reason Revisited”, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, 2001. 13 Indeed, many Cosmopolitans tend to the global market as a natural ally of individualisation and value pluralism. This liberal heritage leads Ulrich Beck and others to list free trade among the core values of a Cosmopolitan outlook. See, for example, Nussbaum, Pogge, Barry, Buchanan and Appiah. 14 Charles Jones, , Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1999, cited in Christine Sypnowich, “Cosmopolitans, Cosmopolitanism, and Human Flourishing”, in Brock and Brighouse (eds.), The Political Philosophy of Cosmopolitanism, p. 56. 15 Beck and Grande, Cosmopolitan Europe, p. 13. 16 Ibid. 17 Kofman, “Figures of the Cosmopolitan, p. 239. 18 Salman Rushdie, Imaginary Homelands: Essays and Criticism, 1981-1991, London, Granta Books, 1991, p. 394, cited in , Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a World of Strangers, New York, W.W. Norton & Company, 2006, p. 112. 19 Barber, 1996, p. 34, cited in Vivienne Boom and Gerard Delanty, “Cosmopolitanism and Europe: Considerations and Contemporary Approaches”, 2007, p. 31. 20 Heidegger, cited in Dobson, “Thick Cosmopolitanism”, p. 169. Dobson borrowed it from J.A. Sholte, Globalization: A Critical Globalisation, Houndmills, Palgrave, 2000, p. 178. 21 , “Privacy, Secrecy, Intimacy, Human Bonds- and Other Collateral Casualities of Liquid Modernity”, The Hedgehog Review, Vol. 13, No. 1 (Spring 2011), pp. 20-29. 22 Martin Jacques, “The Death of Intimacy”, Guardian, 18 September 2008. 23 Ibid. 24 Sypnowich, “Cosmopolitans, Cosmopolitanism, and Human Flourishing”, p. 57. 25 Ibid., p. 58. 26 Ibid., p. 71.

37 Everita Silina

27 Appiah, Cosmopolitanism. 28 Focus on human rights, human security and other individual-based normative principles has highlighted the gaps in and put a pressure on existing state institutions that fail to ensure equal and effective protection of rights. R2P puts a particular emphasis on the positive obligation of states towards the citizens as a condition of sovereignty. 29 Tara McCormack, “Critical Security Studies: Are They Really Critical?”, ARENA Journal, Vol. 32 (2009), p. 139. 30 Boon and Delanty, “Cosmopolitanism and Europe. 31 Ibid., p. 31. 32 Ibid. 33 Ibid. 34 Ibid., p. 32. 35 Ibid., p. 30. 36 Ibid., p. 33. 37 Ibid., p. 34. 38 Ibid. 39 Ibid., p. 25. 40 Rumford, Cosmopolitanism and Europe, p. 17. 41 Golden Dawn is a Greek neo-Nazi party, which received 6.92% of the vote in 2012 national election. It takes a very strong stance on immigration as a national problem and has advocated mining of borders to prevent illegal immigrants from entering Greece. “Greece’s far-right Golden Dawn party maintains share of vote”, Guardian, 18 June 2012. 42 Duncan Kelly, “Multicultural Citizenship: The Limitations of Liberal Democracy”, The Political Quarterly, Vol. 71, No. 1 (January 2000), p. 38. 43 Gideon Rachman, Zero-Sum World: Politics, Power and Prosperity After the Crash, London, Atlantic Books, 2010, p. 208. 44 Aksu, Early Notions of Global Governance, p. 7. 45 Jok Madut Jok, Sudan: Race, Religion and Violence, Oxford, Oneworld Publications, 2007, p. 247.

38