UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD, DEPARTMENT FOR CONTINUING EDUCATION Ewert House, Ewert Place, Oxford, OX2 7DD. Tel: Oxford (01865) 280900 WEEKLY CLASS ASSESSMENT - DECLARATION OF AUTHORSHIP Name (in capitals): JOHN DUNPHY Assignment Deadline: Course Title: International Ethics and Global Justice 11 July Term: TRINITY Date Submitted: Tutor: Douglas Bamford Title of Assignment: Not required for Language courses ‘Is Cosmopolitanism a compelling approach to issues of global justice?’ Word Count: (If applicable) 1,500 Please sign to confirm the following: I, declare that: I am aware of the University's guidance on plagiarism https://www.ox.ac.uk/students/academic/guidance/skills/plagiarism?wssl=1 I have read and understood the Department’s information and guidance on academic good practice and plagiarism given in the Guide to Producing Coursework The work I am submitting is entirely my own work except where otherwise indicated It has not been submitted, either wholly or substantially, for another course of this Department or University, or for a course at any other institution I have clearly indicated the presence of all material I have quoted from other sources, including any images, diagrams, charts, tables or graphs I have clearly signalled the presence of quoted or paraphrased material and referenced all sources I have acknowledged appropriately any assistance I have received in addition to that provided by my tutor I have not copied from the work of any other student I have not used the services of any agency providing specimen, model or ghost-written work in the preparation of this submitted work I agree to retain a copy of this work until receipt of my final result I agree to make any such electronic copy available to the Director of Weekly Classes should it be necessary to confirm my word count or to check for plagiarism Candidate’s Signature: John Dunphy Date: 20/05/2023 DA Form Introduction: When anyone asked him where he came from, he said, “I am a citizen of the world.” —Diogenes Laertius, Life of Diogenes the Cynic I will argue that cosmopolitanism is a compelling approach to a philosophical allegiance to all of humanity, the ideology is not restricted to geographical groups, religious, ethnic, or cultural groups compared to the particularist interest argument. I will also cover the ‘law of equality’ in which all universal agents are measured with global moral worth above family, race, culture, or nationalist circles. I will also telescope cosmopolitanism from ‘the Stoics’ point of view in which every human begin is measured under the term “citizens of the world” (Widdows, 2011, p.71). As cosmopolitanism also shapes what Martha Neussbaum claims: “One owes allegiance to the worldwide community of human beings and this affiliation should constitute a primary allegiance” (Brock, 2009, p.9). For this reason, cosmopolitanism is more compelling since its main ideological crux does not deracinate liberty and freedom as seen with apartheid nationalism such as the Zionist model found in Israel; which seeks to build upon a ‘subjective feeling;’ that only appeals to the philology or biology of the spirit social contract other than a cosmopolitan model that is independent of inward-looking nationalism (Smith, 1983, pp.10-12). To Begin: Cosmopolitanism is a compelling approach to global justice because it outweighs the extremist outcomes of nationalism as suggested by Elie Kedourie. As a result, liberal nationalists like me believe that normative ethics such as peace, prosperity, and freedom attached to cosmopolitanism can unify all agents within our world community; the alternative nationalism, as argued by Kedourie cannot survive the: “Only criterion capable of public defense,” namely, “whether the new rulers are less corrupt and grasping, or more just and merciful, or whether there is no change at all.” For this reason, cosmopolitanism is more compelling since it does not deracinate freedom or liberty in regard to the outsider as seen with apartheid nationalism; nor does this imperative cosmopolitan ideology seek a political messiah that: “looks inwardly away from and beyond the imperfect world” (Smith, 1983, pp.10-12). In contrast, nationalists rank the law of identity above cosmopolitan normative ethics, while pressuring each native agent to worship an authoritarian state’s national superiority against the ethnic outsider (Tamir, 1993, p.17). Cosmopolitanism at least provides a platform for all of humanity, while removing limitations that restrict geographical groups, religious, and ethnic groups from liberty. As this ‘criterion system’ can also strengthen a global ‘moral worth’ above family, race, culture, or nationalist ideas, while further bolstering ‘the Stoics’ philosophical method to provide moral universalism for human begin under this cosmopolitan umbrella is measured under the coined term “citizens of the world” (Widdows, 2011, p.71). Global justice in my hypothesis cannot function without the ‘Law of Peoples’ that liberal social contracts can reinforce. However, this cannot transpire until the above-mentioned law nurtures the principle of reciprocity and that it eliminates ethnocentrism; for the public motive of the ‘Society of Liberal’ and moral Peoples (Rawls, 1999, p.121). Cosmopolitanism is not tied to skin colour, gender, parentage, or birth-era; since all those aforementioned themes can limit a progressive social contract from occurring; and what can describe these ‘natural ties’ as “the beauty of gemeins chaff;” as they can only exhibit a “fictional halo of objectivity about their origin” (Anderson, 2006, p.143). As a result, cosmopolitanism defines the community of human argument based on the laws of aspiration and universal concern that: “Is truly great and truly common, in which we look neither to this corner nor to that, but measure the boundaries of our nation by the sun” as noted by Seneca in his work De Otio. It’s a universal liberal conviction that emphasizes our moral obligations to Kosmou politês also known as the world citizen (Nussbaum, 1994). Today we call this the politics of “multiculturalism,” our global target for the “politics of recognition” that should not be founded on the misrecognition of separatist identity; but on what defines us as human begins. In promoting the opposite such as nationalism, the outsider is convicted to experience the shame of low self-worth; as this can be also analogous to black people existing within a predominately white society, while reflecting Hegel’s dialectic of the master and the slave (Taylor, 1994, p.26). Evidently, this can also mirror what Black Skin, White Masks by Franz Fanon notes as a ‘zone of non-begin’ that ascribes an unfair society founded on prejudice where blackness is utterly locked out in competing with the predominate white world (Drabinski, 2019). As a result, minorities such as black people will find themselves not physically regarded as human beings, especially, without a cosmopolitan system or the dialectics of recognition put in place to acknowledge their full human existence; minorities would feel below white society or at the existential point of total isolation “from the light that makes our societies theistic system,” which would personify minority groups and the restrictions of race endlessly trapped in Dante Alighieri’s Inferno (Gordon, 2005, p.3). Distinctly, this can be reduced by universality or all-inclusiveness in which every human begin is not politically measured by social class, gender, or racial subdivision such as men, aristocrats, Aryans, Whites, or Muslims. All are measured by a definitive totality of moral concern for all universal agents by reflecting a cosmopolitan moral criterion outside prerogative rules or limitations of social or racial subdivision politics (Pogge, 2012, p.14). As Pogge’s interactional view would further address this as a human right, in which all agents have a duty not to enslave each other while rejecting the support of “third party” institutions either legal or economic to enable slavery over the freedom of others (Windows, 2014, p.87). Clearly, this would also reflect Rousseau’s general will, in which the laws of equality, reciprocity, and unity of purpose are made probable; while also securing the right to be equally treated as universal agents out of an age of dignity (Taylor, 1994, p,49). As for the particularist perspective, ‘natural ties’ are seen as sacred against the law of equality as they would suggest that cosmopolitan ideas could adumbrate multicultural division or outlaw regimes manifesting out of this ‘moral worth’ system of equal dignity (Horton, 1994, p.89). Even though particularist ideas of national selectiveness or national superiority; are argued to be more historically entrenched in the nations consciousness, statism as a political annexe of historical nationalism or ethnic nationalism in forcing that all social contract agents worship or obey an all-powerful state; is still considered a totalitarian concept in contrast to the compelling case for cosmopolitanism (UIA, 2020). The particularist model will deracinate freedom and liberty for minorities when extreme versions of nationalism are attached to “the only criterion capable of public defence.” An example of this can be seen in the Zionist Achad Ha’am political model that seeks a nation built upon a ‘subjective feeling’ that evidently, projects inward-looking philology or biology of the spirit nation, other than a cosmopolitan social contact (Smith, 1983, pp.10-11). This is why, we should look toward the Stoics when achieving global justice as we should not separate our differences based on race, class membership or gender limitations. Reason and moral capacity can only surface when we recognize Kant’s idea of the ‘Kingdom of ends’ akin to the world citizen (Nussbaum, 1994). And the promotion of a ‘moral cosmopolitan community or union’ (Cavallar, 2012, p.109). In conclusion: Cosmopolitanism demonstrates a compelling case for global justice since its main humanitarian goal of ‘multiculturalism’ which is designed to recognize what defines us as human beings, without separating our differences in the process of erecting a nationalist identity or the experience of Hegel’s dialectic of the master-slave (Taylor, 1994, p.26). However, cosmopolitanism can hypothesize a world where minority groups can fully contend with a predominantly white society or what Fanon suggested as a ‘zone of non-begin’ (Drabinski, 2019). Indeed, minority groups such as black people would find themselves not physically regarded as human begins or endlessly trapped on the boundaries of race personifying Dante Alighieri’s Inferno; if cosmopolitanism is not applied to acknowledge their full human existence (Gordon, 2005, p.3). As, the compelling crux of cosmopolitanism does not promote a society based on skin colour, gender, parentage, or birth era. But a society built on humanitarian liberal values, not ‘natural ties’ founded on what Anderson calls a: “Fictional halo of objectivity about their origin” (Anderson, 2006, p.143). Since the nationalist model only secures a ‘moral worth’ system based on race, culture, and nationalist parochialism (Widdows, 2011, p.71). This is why cosmopolitanism as a collective global justice ‘political system’ also strengthens Kant’s idea of the ‘Kingdom of ends’ akin to the ‘world citizen’ in recognizing humanity beyond race, social class, and gender limitations (Nussbaum, 1994). Pogge’s interactional view would further convey this as a human right, in which all agents have a duty not to subjugate each other while jettisoning the support of “third party” institutions either legal or economic to enable servitude over the freedom and liberty of others (Windows, 2014, p.87). References: Anderson, B. (2006). Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. Patriotism and Racism. 2nd ed. London and New York: Verso. p.143. Cavallar, G. (2012). Cosmopolitanisms in Kant’s philosophy. Ethics & Global Politics. 5(2), p.p.109. [Online]. Available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.3402/egp.v5i2.14924#:~:text=20%20Moral%20cosmopolitanism%20is [Accessed 18 June 2023]. Drabinski, J. (2019). Frantz Fanon. [Online]. plato.stanford.edu. Last Updated: Mar 14. Available at: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/frantz-fanon/#:~:text=The%20zone%20of%20non%2Dbeing%20is%20the%20 [Accessed 31 May 2023]. Horton, K. (2008). Global Ethics: Seminal Essays. In: Pogge, T. (Ed). Global Ethics: Seminal Essays. St. Paul, Minnesota: Paragon House. p.89. Nussbaum, M.C. (1994). Patriotism and Cosmopolitanism. [Online]. Boston Review. Available at:https://www.bostonreview.net/articles/martha-nussbaum-patriotism-and-cosmopolitanism/ [Accessed 16 June 2023]. Pogge, T. (2012). Cosmopolitanism: A Path To Peace and And Justice. Journal of East-West Thought. 2(4), p.14. [Online]. Available at: https://www.cpp.edu/~jet/Documents/JET/Jet5/Pogge9-32.pdf [Accessed 16 June 2023]. Rawls, J. (1999). Conclusion. The Law of Peoples with "The Idea of Public Reason Revisited. Cambridge, Massachusetts, London, England: Harvard University Press. p.121. Rawls, J. (1999). Introduction. The Law of Peoples with "The Idea of Public Reason Revisited. Cambridge, Massachusetts, London, England: Harvard University Press. p.9. Smith, A.D. (1983). The Doctrine And Its Critics. In: Theories of Nationalism. 2nd ed. London: Duckworth. pp.10-11. Tamir, Y. (1993). The Idea of The Person. Liberal Nationalism. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. p.17. Tamir, Y. (1993). The Magic Pronoun “My.” Liberal Nationalism. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. p.103. Taylor, C. (1994). The Politics of Recognition. In: Gutmann, A. (Ed). Multiculturalism. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. p.41. UIA. The Encyclopedia of World Problems and Human Potential. (05 October 2022). Irresponsible nationalism. [Online]. encyclopedia.uia.org. Available at: http://encyclopedia.uia.org/en/problem/132716 [Accessed 6 May 2023]. Widdows, H. (2011). Political For Global Ethics. In: Global Ethics: An introduction. Oxfordshire: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group. pp.71-87. Gordon, L.R. (2005). Through the Zone of Nonbeing: A Reading of Black Skin, White Masks in Celebration of Fanon’s Eightieth Birthday*. The C.L.R. James Journal. 11(1), p.p.3. [Online]. Available at: https://globalstudies.trinity.duke.edu/sites/globalstudies.trinity.duke.edu/files/file-attachments/v [Accessed 17 June 2023].