THE TOURIST AND THE MIGRANT – TWO FACES OF THE 21ST CENTURY COSMOPOLITANISM

It is no big secret that in our world of great economic inequalities, belonging to somepolitical communities is just more valuable than belonging to others. And this divide is exactlywhat differentiates contemporary “unwoken” cosmopolitans into two categories – the touristand the migrant. In a certain way, both of those ideal figures embody cosmopolitan values ofearlier times, as they are “transgressing” the political borders of communities. Although boththe tourist and the migrant with their transgressions are helping the intercommunal exchangeand understanding between the peoples, their societal acceptance is wildly different. Whiletourists are rarely unwelcomed, mainly because they do not interact profoundly with domesticpopulation as they intend to return to their point of origin, migrants with their wish for “deeperconnections” are viewed with suspicion, if not outright hatred. And this difference stronglyputs into question the principle of hospitality, which is, following the work of ImmanuelKant, considered a basic building block of modern cosmopolitan theory. Finally, this paperwill try to make case that for the true cosmopolitan ideals to take hold, there is a need for areformulation of the current idea of hospitality, from the one based on the economy towardsthe one based on humanistic ideals. And this need is especially more pressing considering theturn of events provoked by the global pandemic, which are strengthening and slowly closingthe borders between our countries and each other

Cosmopolitan Identity – historical origins and contemporary relevance

The idea of cosmopolitanism owes its origin to the Cynic Diogenes of Sinope, who first proclaimed, “I am cosmopolitan!” Although this identification was primarily negative in the sense that he did not declare it with the intention of becoming the first “citizen of the world” but rather to express disagreement with the laws of the ancient poleis, the Stoic school had consequently taken his initial idea and turned it into a comprehensive concept: the unity of humanity based on the shared ability to reason. At the beginning of the 21st century, this ancient idea is deemed a well-known concept. Indeed, cosmopolitanism is today primarily regarded as a specific idea, or behavioural pattern, represented by cosmopolitans or citizens of the world. Cosmopolitans, in turn, are those who consider themselves unfettered by the boundaries of existing political communities and their loyalty is not to any particular political community, rather they owe their loyalty to the more universal community of all human beings. By itself, this definition is accurate, but it is also too narrow, because the cosmopolitan idea involves so much more. From its former definition as mere detachment from the political systems of nation states and as the notion of “openness to the world”, cosmopolitanism is now beginning to be seen as a legal and political framework, as an ethical ideal and vision of justice, as well as a type of identity choice made by individuals. This essay will try to demonstrate that what all of these different contemporary views on cosmopolitanism share is a vision of social belonging that cuts across the political boundaries imposed upon us, as well as a construction of new cosmopolitan identities that have just begun to erode our current understanding of the political community

Fairness through regulation? Reflections on a cosmopolitan approach to global finance

In the aftermath of the last financial crisis a strong message prevails that ‘something’ has to be changed in the manner global finance is governed. What exactly this ‘something’ entails and what could constitute the ‘common ground’ of anticipated change is more difficult to determine. Many envisage future improvements of global financial governance by evoking deliberative democracy, political equality and cosmopolitanism. As financial regulation is the main instrument through which global finance is shaped and governed nowadays, these principles should then be transmitted to regulatory arrangements. This paper focuses on a new conceptual approach to regulatory and governance issues in global finance, by employing the philosophical idea of cosmopolitanism. It argues that although as a concept, cosmopolitanism cannot mitigate all the flaws attributed to contemporary finance, its development and extension to international financial regulation that is promulgated by institutions of the global financial system, would represent a worthwhile endeavour in making global finance more accountable and just in the eyes of many

EMU'S GOVERNANCE POST-CRISIS: WHAT ROLE FOR INTERGOVERNMENTALISM?

Over the years EU member states favored an intergovernmental approach to policy-making within the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU). This approach emphasized the role played by national authorities, as member states' representatives, within a “soft governance” framework. In this framework, national representatives voluntarily participated in various coordinative networks and committees, which relied on interstate negotiations to create policies. However, the Euro area crisis highlighted the shortcomings of the intergovernmental approach to policy-making, such as divergent implementation of policies and regulatory arbitrage, which undermined the EMU’s stability. After the crisis, we are witnessing a centralization of policy creation processes and decision-making within the EMU, with apparently limited room for “old intergovernmentalism”. New actors such as the European Supervisory Authorities, perfectly embody this development since they require from member states to commonly agree “under the shadow” of non-majoritarian institutions, at times even against their own policy preferences. This raises important questions on the role of “old” conceptual frameworks in explaining current EU integration. Therefore, this paper explores the concept of intergovernmentalism (and also, “liberal intergovernmentalism”) as one the key driving forces within EMU’s governance, offering further insight into raised questions as well as arguing in favor of its political and integrationist potential in the years to come

ON HOSPITALITY (AFTER THE CRISIS)

The global COVID-19 pandemic will affect our lives in many different aspects, ofwhich the societal changes will be the ones hardest to predict or to alleviate. The focus ofthis paper will be on the idea of hospitality which will certainly come into question afterthe age of quarantine, social distancing and closed state borders passes. By providinghistorical overview and referencing authors such as Immanuel Kant, Jacques Derrida andSeyla Benhabib, the connection between the ideas of hospitality and cosmopolitanism will beexamined. Consequently, the main aim of the paper will be to ascertain if we can still supportthe idea of the law of unconditional hospitality that cosmopolitans endorse, or has our currentsituation of global pandemic changed the situation so drastically that the conditional laws ofhospitality are truly the best we can hope for

Cosmopolitics as a Precondition for Global Justice

Živote koje ćemo voditi ne određuju samo naša tijela, nego i okolina u kojima će se ta tijela nalaziti. Sama činjenica da rođenje osoba istih tjelesnih i mentalnih sposobnosti na različitim mjestima na Zemlji dovodi do potpuno drukčijih životnih prilika trebala bi nas zabrinjavati. I dok se puka tjelesnost ne može i ne bi smjela jednačiti kako bi se postigla pravednost u prilikama koje pojedinci imaju u društvu, odnosi unutar i među političkim zajednicama se mogu i moraju mijenjati ako želimo pravedniji svijet. Kozmopolitika kao grana politič- ke filozofije, kroz prožimanje ideja kozmopolitizma i demokracije, bavi se razmatranjima kako je te je li uopće moguće stvoriti istovremeno pravedan i učinkovit globalni politički sustav. Ovaj rad će pružiti pregled osnovnih problema vezanih uz uspostavu kozmopolitske demokracije, te će na samom kraju biti razmotreni i neki konkretniji prijedlozi za uspostavu kozmopolitske demokracije teoretičara kao što su David Held i Daniele Archibugi.Lives that we are going to lead are not determined only by our bodies, they are also determined by the surroundings in which these bodies reside. The fact that the birth of a person of the same physical and mental abilities in different regions of the Earth leads to a completely different life opportunities should deeply concern us. While the sheer physicality cannot and should not be equalized to achieve fairness in opportunities that individuals have in society, relations within and among political communities could and should be changed if we want a fairer world. Cosmopolitics as a branch of political philosophy, through intertwining the ideas of cosmopolitanism and democracy, deals with the considerations of possibility and probability of creating the global political system that is at the same time just and efficient. This article will provide an overview of basic problems related to the establishment of cosmopolitan democracy, and finally, it will consider some of the concrete proposals for its establishment by the theorists such as David Held and Daniele Archibugi

Cosmopolitan and/or Imperial Peace as the Foundation of Global Governance

Kozmopolitizam i imperij dijele dugu zajedničku povijest koja seže još u antička vremena. Kozmopolitizam kao ideju sigurno ne bismo poznavali da nije bilo političke organizacije poput imperija, a imperijalni oblik vladavine sigurno ne bio toliko uspješan da se kozmopolitizam nije barem djelomično nalazio u opravdanju i očuvanju niza imperijalnih projekata. Interes za ideju kozmopolitizma obnovljen je u posljednjih dvadeset godina pojavom globalizacijske teorije, a također se čini da je i imperij, bilo da je odobravan ili osporavan, u skorije vrijeme postao popularan organizacijski koncept u akademskim diskusijama o našem trenutnom globalnom političkom stanju. Uspostava mira i njegovo održanje u oba ova koncepta igraju značajnu ulogu, no je li uopće moguće razlučiti kozmopolitsko od imperijalnog shvaćanja mira te kako ove sličnosti (i razlike) utječu na razvitak današnjeg globalnog vladanja?Cosmopolitanism and empire share a long history together, dating back to Antiquity. We would certainly not know of cosmopolitan idea if political organization such as Empire did not exist, and the imperial form of government certainly would not be so successful if cosmopolitanism was not at least partially involved in the justification and preservation of the series of imperial projects. Interest in the cosmopolitan idea was renewed in the last twenty years with the appearance of globalization theory, but it also appears that empire, whether it is accepted or disputed, also became a popular organizational concept in academic discussions about our current global political situation. In both of those concepts the establishment of peace and its maintenance plays an important role, but is it even possible to distinguish between cosmopolitan and imperial understanding of peace, and how these similarities (and differences) affect the development of today’s global governance