Creating A Perfect World Or Defending The Country

In Marcelo’s Gleiser’s “Globalization: Two Visions of the Future of Humanity,” he explores both the positive and negative outcomes possible if the world were to become one globalized society. Gleiser paints a picture of futurist’s supposed utopia that is predicted for the future of the world. This includes major technological advances that would bring every country and society together, therefore sharing the same goods and values and eliminating war. Gleiser questions how accurate this is and contrasts this view with an article from Michael Shermer. This article argues that due to our natural human tendencies to stray away from other walks of life besides our own, a seamless utopia isn’t realistic. Gleiser provides his readers a reminder about how strong fundamentalism has presented itself when situations of integrating cultures come

Humankind would be a better place if we were all just citizens of the world. In Martha Nussbaum’s “Patriotism and Cosmopolitanism” she argues whether children should be taught in education to be patriotic or cosmopolitan. Nussbaum’s definition of cosmopolitanism is a person whose primary allegiance is to the community of human beings in the entire world. Nussbaum begins her argument by raising questions about education and how students ought to be taught that hunger in third world countries are problems of global problems and not the countries problem. She says “We should regard out deliberations as, first and foremost, deliberations about human problems of people in particular concrete situations, not problems growing out of a national

The English School (ES) of international studies is a modern and unique spectrum to the study of international relations (IR), because it is prominent, relevant and inclusive of the main elements in the other IR theories such as classical Realism, Neorealism, Marxism, Liberalism (Buzan & Gonzalez-Pelaez, 2009), Globalization (Buzan, 2004), Humanitarianism and Positivism IR theories (Buzan & Gonzalez-Pelaez, 2009, p.2-3). The ES of IR is built on the notion of “international society”, in which the states are the primary actors, engaging, co-operating and conversing to produce joint strategies, interventions and arrangements which help to maintain their inter-relations and shared interests to resolve matters (Cornelia Navari, p. 1). The ES embraces the social aspect through dialogue between players on the international politics arena with recognition of sovereignty, solidarity, level of power and leverage, self-interests and competitiveness each state holds in the international realm. It is therefore not a system like most other IR theories but the methodology for contemporary international conversation (Buzan & Gonzalez-Pelaez, 2009 p. 3) between two or more states when necessary within the global framework of laws, international institutions and customary aspects (Buzan & Gonzalez-Pelaez, 2009, pp.3-4). In the 1984 publication ‘The Expansion of International Society’, the classic ES definition is

Individuals of the same ethnic background share the same culture a factor that explains that there, as many cultures as there are ethnic backgrounds across the world. Globalization has, however, led to interaction of people from varied cultural backgrounds. Because of the interaction, globalization has been accused of limiting cultural diversity. It is, however, not the case in reality. The purpose of this paper is to analyze some of the factors that justify that globalization has not limited cultural diversity as its critics say. Thus, globalization should not be viewed as a hindrance to cultural diversity because the best subject of moral concern should be the individual person and not the nation, community or the society.

George Kennan says, “Morality in governmental method, as a matter of conscience and preference on the part of our people – yes.” He goes on to say that morality as a criterion for measuring and comparing the behavior of states is flawed. Morality is a preference, not a requirement to govern in the international anarchic system, Kennan argues. Ethics and justice in the international system are measured by how states satisfy varying moral requirements. These moral requirements are defined by a variety of schools of thought, including: Realists, Morality of States theorists, and Cosmopolitans. Realists may validate some action where morality of state theorists and cosmopolitans are fundamentally opposed. In this paper I will

In Kwame Appiah’s introductory chapter, Critical Thinking, he delves into the topic of cosmopolitanism, and its necessity within our modern world. Appiah claims that while complete cosmopolitanism may not be obtainable or optimal, partial cosmopolitanism is the ideal model for us to follow. He supports this claim by highlighting that the modern world is expanding rapidly in its population leading to a critical need for conversations to be established amongst ourselves. As a civilization who is divided by borders, social and cultural constructs we have little to no room for the fundamental ethical bonds that we possessed thousands of years ago. Furthermore, not only is our exponentially growing population the issue, but also our blatant

Amidst the global attempts to establish worldwide peace on a moral ground, there are still several events where international security, peace, and justice are sacrificed for national benefits, as, for example, seen in the United States’ nonintervention policy, which prioritizes national sovereignty. In his book Moral Man and Immoral Society, Reinhold Niebuhr indicated that each nation-state had a “collective egoism” that was beyond moral or rational explanation. Although the book was published in 1932, well before any realization of human rights protection law or organization, Niebuhr’s message remains true to the present context: the contemporary culture, religious or secular, still fails to recognize the collective egoism in human institutions. His argument regarding the dynamics of power remains relevant. However, there is a sign of hope, as there are numerous organizations aimed to reduce each nation’s collective egoism and emphasizes why a

In the pursuit to gain the greatest understanding and respect of human rights projects and global social justice cosmopolitanism is necessary. Looking at cosmopolitism’s roots, features and limits through the lenses of authors Fine, Held and Calhoun to further address the importance of this ideal regardless of its weaknesses. Following the debate of whether critics are right about cosmopolitanisms liberal biases undermining its critical potential will be discussed, to suggest where cosmopolitanism needs adjustments in order to progress. Lastly, this paper will consider the idea that cosmopolitan ideals are more necessary then ever given the resurgence of nationalist and isolationist politics worldwide. Through an overall analysis of

In a growing westernized society built on the principles of freedom, it important to note that the rest of the world is not as privileged as civilization has not always been this way. The idea of state sovereignty, the legal authority of a government over its population, has evolved and adapted throughout history. Post World War II, the world was is an utter shock of what humanity was capable of. Moving forward, a variety of political institutions and documents were created in order to protect global human rights. However many of these institutions were mostly composed of western ideologies and European norms, that by imposing them on the rest of the world can be seen as cultural imperialism (Calhoun, p.15-17). Due to different social, political,

Mary Robinson is the former president of Ireland and the United Nations Human Rights Commissioner. In a recent interview with Rachel Martin of npr.org, titled How Human Rights Efforts and The Fight Against Climate Change Are Related, Mary Robinson discusses how the global climate and the way that we treat each other has changed from an environment of global cooperation to a much more hostile and less cooperative environment. This can be attributed to globalization which is when society is being internationally influenced, and businesses within the society are operating on an international scale. Mary Robinson uses the various components of globalization to describe

Delsol’s discusses how the “murderous character of the twentieth century emerged” from conflict between morality and faith in order to explain how the idea of a world government emerged. After the Cold War, it was evident that people had been obedient to authority instead of morality. Delsol argues that this led to a “contemporary resolve to establish institutions of international justice” in order “to make ethics or morality everywhere supreme over obedience to a leader or to a system.” The emergence of an

My fellow friends and Loyalists, we have been betrayed by our own. Patriots are what they call themselves. They do not believe in our king anymore. The king has supported us and fought for us and in return they cause a rebellion. King George once said, “A traitor is everyone who does not agree with me,“ and he is beyond correct. Anyone who sides beside them are committing treason and ought to be penalized. We shall stay with Britain because we are stronger than the Patriots, trade is successful, and the economy is sustainable.

Cosmopolitanism does have its limits in achieving its aims. It is necessary that one tracks the historical roots of cosmopolitanism to understand what visions it sets out to propose for IR. In Hellenic era, cosmopolitanism finds its meaning when Alexandrian intermarriage took place (Russel, 1945: 220), introducing the concept of ‘mankind as a whole’. Similar notion came into being in Stoicism in which people, apart from their own local identity, are united under a world citizenship (Nussbaum, 2010: 156). Kant, in the eighteenth century, furthered expounded on cosmopolitanism by suggesting a rule of cosmopolitan law and universal liberties (Held, 2010: 3).

Globalization is commonly examined by simply dissecting its political and economic consequences. As a result, the effects on culture are often overlooked. According to U.S. Census projections, by 2043 non-Hispanic whites will become a minority consisting of 47 percent of the U.S. population (Barreto, et al 1). Examining the world as a whole, a 2015 study by the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs/Population Division found that between 1950-2000, an average of 2.8 million people per year migrated to North America and Europe. From 2000-2015, that rate accelerated to 4.1 million per year. What is more, this study projects that from 2015-2050, 91 million people are expected to migrate to high-income countries and produce an 82 percent increase in population in destination countries. Clearly, the prospect of steady migration and the continuing effects of globalization are expected to produce more multicultural societies. Unfortunately for many, “foreign” has become synonymous with danger (Rothkopf). The debate between cultural unity and cultural plurality dates back to the Greeks where they questioned universal human goodness and the differences between societies. More than two millennia later, the issue of a common versus diverse human culture remains contentious. This paper argues that a diverse human culture is more desirable than a universal culture because states and societies benefit from promoting and protecting diversity.

Global problem-solving and morals cross in various ways. Clearly, the way in which issues, for example, environmental change, asset consumption, vicious passing, savage disparities in life chances, and dangers to biodiversity are drawn nearer and considered, not to mention determined, epitomize muultiple and significant moral issues. At the most fundamental level, the impression of the presence of an issue is gotten from a feeling of incongruence between a given circumstance and the qualities the viewer esteems pertinent to that circumstance. As needs be the structure of qualities that prompts the esteeming of issues as "worldwide issues" needs examination. In any case, similarly, issues are not "comprehended" in any dynamic or immaterial unbiased or "quality free" sense. They are determined, or there is work to determine them, in headings or as per criteria and objectives got from qualities sets. As needs be, the qualities appended to or fundamental, unequivocally or verifiably, worldwide critical thinking activities and originations needs examination. There are no less than three fundamental ranges of convergence of morals and worldwide issues, nearly between related, and each of which has various consequent particular zones. ("Global ethics and problem solving | Nautilus Institute for Security and Sustainability," n.d.) Two are mention below.