The Importance Of Cosmopolitanism In The Modern World

The Internet is playing a very important role in the evolution of digital technology, but although it has seen remarkable growth over the last few years, its dispersion remains highly asymmetric. It is widely believed that the so called information age will bring radical change and improvement, and countries all over the world are busy with constructing the necessary infrastructure, the "information superhighways," in order to meet the challenges of the information society of the twenty-first century. Kwame Anthony Appiah’s essay “Making Conversation” tell us about human’s conversation

Commentators contend that globalization has disintegrated national sway and has brought about an exchange of force from states to enterprises or to universal associations. Since the late 1970s, there has been a developing acknowledgment of a belief system, frequently called "globalism," that supports an open market and constrained government impedance in capital and exchange streams. Corporate hobbies have driven this motivation, which they have forced, the faultfinders contend, on the creating

The world’s population is continuously increasing and laws are being made to maintain a global social order. The social order includes, and is not limited to, world peace, free international economy, international trade, and assurance that basic human rights are respected by all nations and humans live a decent life, full of opportunities. This is an ideal that we all aspire to, in a way or another and although we want to create a perfect world, it is impossible to do so because of people’s interests and their own view of “perfection.” We, as humans, are not perfect, and therefore we cannot have a perfect world. Many have tried to create ideas of what would make a perfect society. Socrates, Plato and Aristotle have diligently tried for centuries to establish a well-balanced world in which each individual has their own freedom. More than two thousand years have passed since then and the world is still struggling to find a way to create a harmonious international society. Cosmopolitanism and anti-cosmopolitanism have different ideas on how we can achieve this goal. To me, a combination of the two sounds more achievable. In this paper, I will try to demonstrate that today’s world is a combination of the two and ideas from both will take us a few steps forward towards an international goal.

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

The concept of being a good international citizen departs from this view and has us believe “that states should be cognisant of and accountable to in the conduct of their international politics and foreign policy…” (Langlois, pp. 221). However, there are many barriers to the creation of this cosmopolitan world order and its promotion of human rights. At the core of international relations theory, it is held that all states are considered sovereign. The state has the authority to govern within its territory without the interference of outside states or actors.

Over the course of history, domestic politics have been shaped by international forces. Forces like war and trade; empire and colonies; migration and the spread of ideas. Globalization and Neoliberalism plays an important role in impacting politics in all states. “Globalization is a system in which human beings are no longer part of isolated communities that are linked through narrow channels of diplomatic relations of trade”(O’Neil,2017, pg.346). Globalization creates a division between international relations and domestic politics. When globalization makes a distinction, then the aspects of domestic politics are controlled by global forces. Globalization changes the  institutions of economics, politics, and society. The institutions are measure by space and time of social norms, culture, boundaries. The boundaries create a local identity and control (particularly-“state, religion, or set of cultural values holds sway over the land and here but not there.”)(O’Neil, 2015, pg.348).  Furthermore, political isolation becomes impossible to happen.

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

Globalization implies distinctive things to diverse individuals. To the individuals who support it, it speaks to less explanations behind outfitted clashes, more open doors for getting away from the bounds custom and bias, a higher expectation for everyday comforts, and more access to the great things of life; so, private enterprise and majority rules system. To the individuals who doubt it or disdain it, it implies the submersion of national power, the elimination of territorial societies, the advancement of multinational enterprises and the chapter 11 of corner stores, the undermining of religion, and the defilement of profound quality; to put it plainly, private enterprise and popular government.

In this article called “Globalization and Global Political Theory,” talks about how our culture, economics, political, and respectable relationship with complete strangers from all over the

and consciousness across world-time and world-space” (Steger). In other words, globalization applies to an arrangement of social procedures that seems to change our present social

‘Globalization: What’s new? What’s not? (And so what)’, portrays the speed in which globalism has increased through many different factors; economically, military, environmentally and socially. This is an idealist analytic approach, not set in stone. This leads on to

As a result globalisation has also undone some important cultural and psychological underpinnings of sovereignty. However, it is imperative to note that the effect of globalisation on different nation states will not be the same, because states differ domestically, historically, politically and socio-culturally. Therefore, states will make different policy choices in response to the same global phenomena (Held 1989, 237).

The concept of globalization is a complex and peculiar one, failing to be definable by a single, precise definition. Centrally, globalization involves information and goods being exchanged amongst different countries. These interactions and interchanges among countries globally over time is due to an increase in communication and transport networks. Globalization is often divided into three main areas being economic globalization, cultural globalization and political globalization. All three are vital areas to one’s life and globalization is said to have a large impact on each. Although globalization is controversial in the aspect that it cannot be declared just how much of an influence the notion has in the world. Political scientists such as Muhammad Ijaz Latif, Anton Pelinka and Martin Wolf all discuss this issue in their respective pieces as well as differing aspects of globalization such as the role the European Union plays in relation to globalization, the different perspectives of globalization and the challenges of the nation-state in regards to globalization.

Drawing on those historical developments, this essay takes cosmopolitanism as an ideal that posits that people are citizens of the world and are subject to a common normative standard. (Dunne, 2013: 348). By extension, it suggests that ‘obligations and allegiances are to the universal category of humankind’ (Dunne, 2013: 348).

In the article “Nationalism, Patriotism, and Cosmopolitanism in an Age of Globalization” author Robert Audi (2009) identifies different levels of nationalism and cosmopolitanism and how they can affect globalization. Audi categorizes nationalism and cosmopolitanism as being extreme, moderate, and minimal.