Leyva, Karel J.

PhilPapers

Recent decades have seen a notable shift from international to cosmopolitan governance, expanding the focusfrom traditional state-level norms to include a broader array of actors like international organizations, transnationalcorporations, NGOs, and emerging network forms.Driven by a remarkable expansion in globally applicable governance tools and signi cant impacts from market forcesand corporate power on national economic policies, these changes signify a move toward a more decentralizedgovernance approach. The evolving scenario fragments state authority and blurs the lines betweengovernmental duties and private sector in uence, complicating policymaking on both national and internationalscales.This transformation underscores a globalizing political landscape, increasingly de ned by intricate, multi-tieredinteractions that surpass national borders. Such dynamics question the e ectiveness of democratic governance andthe robustness required to sustain democratic values within institutions and processes.Contemporary conditions strain traditional democracies, constricting government options and diluting citizenin uence, while shifting power to larger regional and global entities, potentially leading to democratic de cits.However, these conditions also foster new avenues to enhance democratic practices through expansive networks.In response, a burgeoning academic  eld focusing on the prerequisites for global democracy has emerged. Researchersare investigating the legitimization of political authority beyond the nation-state and debating eligibility forparticipation in global rule-making. Their work explores the friction between national sovereignty and globalgovernance and examines the role of transnational civil societies, o ering a variety of normative viewpoints onrealizing global democracy and its potential impact on national democratic frameworks.The Moral Foundations of Cosmopolitan DemocracyCosmopolitanism in contemporary political theory advocates for globalpolitics that transcend state boundaries.“Rethinking Sovereignty: A Path to Cosmopolitan DemocracyGlobal shifts in civil liberties and political rights prompt a reevaluation of how cosmopolitan democracycan adapt and remain relevant in changing international contexts.Karel J. Leyva  Published May 2, 2024Cosmopolitanism in contemporary political theory advocates for global politics that transcend state boundaries,highlighting the importance of universal laws and institutions. This approach is rooted in three core moralprinciples that challenge state-centric views and promote a global ethical and political framework recognizing eachindividual’s universal moral value.First Principle: Egalitarian Individualism. This principle views individuals as the fundamental units of moralconcern, challenging the notion that states or other associations determine moral worth. It emphasizes that allindividuals deserve equal respect and consideration, countering the idea that moral value is limited to communitymembership.Second Principle: Reciprocal Recognition. This principle asserts that the status of equal value, respect, andconsideration should be universally recognized. It promotes relationships based on mutual recognition, valuing eachindividual’s worth.Third Principle: Impartial Treatment. Following the ideals of equality and mutual respect, this principle requiresimpartial treatment of each person’s claims. Cosmopolitanism uses this as a framework to de ne universally applicablerules and principles, fostering inclusivity and fairness.Despite recognition of these principles in post-World War II international e orts, David Held critiques their partialimplementation in current global structures. He notes that while egalitarian individualism is acknowledged, it does notfundamentally shape social and economic policies.Although the principle of universal recognition supports human rights and legal initiatives, it remains secondary instate and corporate policies. Moreover, the principle of impartial moral reasoning, justifying limits on state actions andinternational organizations, often plays a marginal role in institutional dynamics, particularly given the cross-borderimpacts of national economic and energy policies.Cosmopolitan theory points out the need to dismantle illegitimate power structures and establish institutions thatensure transparent and equitable governance. Held identi es a paradox: the increasing transboundary nature ofcollective issues versus the inadequate means to address them.Autonomy is limited by transnational dynamics, challenging the traditionalview of states as fully independent.‘Advancing these cosmopolitan principles politically requires developing “public democratic law”—a system of rightsand obligations that legitimizes authority and power across governance levels. This shift necessitates rethinkingsovereignty and moving beyond national governance to enhance democratic autonomy, accountability, and legitimacyin a more interconnected global context.The Core Assumptions of Cosmopolitan DemocracyCosmopolitan democracy theories emerged following the democratization wave post-Cold War, aiming to melddemocratic progress within states with the application of democratic principles globally, based on two centralassumptions.First Assumption: De Jure Sovereignty vs. De Facto Autonomy. This assumption highlights that while statespossess sovereignty in law (de jure), they lack real (de facto) autonomy due to global challenges like environmentalthreats, disease, migration, and international terrorism. These issues suggest that true autonomy is limited bytransnational dynamics, challenging the traditional view of states as fully independent.Second Assumption: Democratic States and Foreign Policy. This idea scrutinizes the external actions of democraticstates, noting that democratic and non-democratic states often exhibit similar foreign policies. Despite intentions topromote peace and democracy, actions such as warfare reveal a disconnect between domestic democratic values andtheir international application.From these assumptions, seven key hypotheses have developed, shaping the theory of cosmopolitan democracy:Cosmopolitan democracy emphasizes the institutionalization of democraticprinciples across multiple levels of governance on a global scale.“ Democracy as a Process. Democracy is not a static set of norms but an ongoing, dynamic process. This viewaccommodates the changing nature of rights and the  uidity of decision-making, asserting that the trajectory ofdemocracy is not  xed.State Disputes and Internal Democracy. Inter-state con icts undermine internal state democracy. A non-peacefulinternational environment can sti e dissent and curtail freedoms, with the international state system impactingdomestic power dynamics and sometimes suppressing democracy through the pretext of foreign threats.State Democracy and Peace. While internal democracy tends to foster peace, it does not guarantee a virtuous foreignpolicy. Democratic institutions might prevent governments from waging unnecessary wars, yet these restraints are notalways consistent with democratic foreign policies.These hypotheses outline the complexities and goals of cosmopolitan democracy, stressing the challenges andopportunities for more inclusive and fair global governance.Governance Levels in Cosmopolitan DemocracyCosmopolitan democracy extends beyond merely advocating for the institutionalization of democracy at a global scale;it emphasizes its cultivation across multiple levels of governance. This includes local, state, inter-state, regional, andglobal dimensions.Global Democracy. Global democracy entails more than just democratization within states. It requires a widerimplementation of democratic principles internationally, going beyond merely strengthening the rule of internationallaw.Globalization and State Autonomy. Globalization reduces states’ political autonomy, impacting the e cacy ofdemocracy within states. International obligations increasingly restrict states’ political choices, raising issues about theframeworks needed for democratic deliberation on global issues across various political communities.Stakeholder Communities Beyond Borders. Issues often a ect communities that extend beyond national borders,necessitating inclusive and subsidiary approaches. A ected individuals should have the opportunity to in uencedecisions impacting them, regardless of their location.Global Movements and Social Solidarity. Globalization has catalyzed new social movements focused on human rights,environmental issues, and justice, linking diverse global populations. This emerging solidarity exceeds nationalloyalties, promoting the development of international public spheres and NGOs dedicated to global advocacy.Local Level. At the local level, cosmopolitan democracy integrates global connectivity, as local networks frequentlyparticipate in international activities. Multicultural communities, often expanded by immigration, project theirin uence beyond national borders, connecting with intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations. Thisintegration suggests a role for local governance structures to transcend state boundaries e ectively.State Level. Theorists like Archibugi and Held recognize both internal and external dimensions in realizingcosmopolitan democracy at the state level. Domestically, democratic states act as testing grounds for cosmopolitanpractices, encouraging varied political participation re ective of linguistic, cultural, and ethno-religious diversity.These states extend rights to traditionally marginalized groups (e.g., refugees and immigrants), adoptingdi erentiated rights that acknowledge diverse community identities.Inter-State Level. At the inter-state level, the focus is on cultivating democratic principles such as equality amongstates and public accountability. Despite criticisms of overlapping competencies and democratic de cits inintergovernmental organizations, cosmopolitan theorists call for improved transparency, legitimacy, andaccountability, advocating for better coordination to tackle shared challenges e ectively.Cosmopolitan democracy proposes rede ning legitimate political authority by decoupling it from traditional territorialcon nes. It envisions a system where diverse political communities from local to global levels hold decision-makersaccountable, enhancing freedom and equality in shaping life conditions. This multi-level approach challengestraditional notions of sovereignty and advocates for a model that fosters multi-level citizenship and a robust system tosafeguard human rights, enabling inclusive participation across all governance levels.Cosmopolitan Democracy and National DemocratizationCosmopolitan democracy involves more than transferring democratic principles to the global sphere; it also entails theprioritization of speci c objectives by global institutions. Archibugi has outlined  ve core objectives that globalinstitutions should prioritize, albeit not exclusively.First Objective: Control of Force Use. Minimizing political violence both within and between states is crucial,extending the non-violence principle fundamental to democracy. This objective focuses on encouraging peacefulresolutions over military or violent responses.Second Objective: Preservation and Promotion of Cultural Diversity. This goal involves safeguarding andenhancing cultural diversity within the global system. By promoting a diverse cultural mosaic, various identities cancoexist and  ourish in an interconnected world.Third Objective: Strengthening Self-Determination. Ensuring that each community governs itself without externalin uence aims to boost citizen participation and protect community autonomy from foreign control.Regional Level. Regionally, cosmopolites underscore the role of regional organizations and networks in fosteringstability, particularly in regions less familiar with democracy. Such entities, comprising state and local communityrepresentatives, could play crucial roles in managing con icts, especially in ethnically diverse regions of Africa.Proposals for establishing regional parliaments and enhancing governance structures like those in the EuropeanUnion aim to ensure that regional decisions are recognized as legitimate regulatory authorities.Global Level. Globally, the active participation of non-governmental actors in UN summits and within agencieslike the IMF and WTO highlights a shift towards a governance level that surpasses the state. This evolving structureseeks to improve transparency, oversight, and accountability in global governance.Proponents of global democracy aim to remedy democratic de cits not onlywithin international organizations but also at the national level.“Fourth Objective: Oversight of Internal State A airs. While supporting self-determination, there’s a need toprevent authoritarian governance harmful to community members. Mechanisms for intervening in state a airs shouldfocus on human rights protection and preventing domination over sub-communities.Fifth Objective: Participatory Management of Global Issues. Enhancing political equality in global a airs,especially in managing global commons, is essential. This extends the principle of equality to the decision-makingprocesses a ecting global resources, ensuring all voices are heard.These objectives interact signi cantly with national dimensions as they involve global institutions in safeguarding andenhancing democracy, both in authoritarian and established democratic contexts.The Role of International Organizations in Promoting DemocracyProponents of global democracy aim to remedy democratic de cits not only within international organizations but alsoat the national level. Archibugi and Cellini highlight that organizations in uenced by non-democratic states oftenstruggle to foster democratization, mirroring the challenges faced by national e orts within a non-democratic globalframework.Traditional strategies for promoting national democratization include military interventions to overthrowauthoritarian regimes, showcasing democratic achievements as models for non-democratic states, engaging insocialization with countries in transition, and employing conditional approaches that leverage incentives or penalties toencourage democratic reforms.However, cosmopolitan theorists advocate for a more constructive approach, emphasizing the need for internationalorganizations to actively support democratic practices. This involves fostering closer ties with non-governmentalorganizations (NGOs) and improving participation, transparency, and accountability. Speci cally, Archibugi proposesthree targeted strategies to enhance internal democratization:These initiatives underscore the cosmopolitan view that civil society should play a signi cant role in foreign policydecisions. By directing trade, tourism, and economic aid towards countries that uphold human rights, cosmopolitans1. Stability during Transition: Ensuring that political, economic, and social transitions occur smoothly, avoidingviolent disruptions or the replacement of one authoritarian regime with another.2. De ning Future Coexistence Rules: Leveraging the membership of international organizations to set examplesfor new regimes and safeguard them against destabilizing forces such as coups.3. Constitutional and Electoral Assistance: Providing support for the design of fair constitutions and electoralsystems to ensure equitable processes and outcomes.envision citizens of democratic nations as ambassadors of democracy, fostering global solidarity with thoseliving under oppressive regimes.Conclusion: The Rede nition of Democratic Legitimacy and FutureDirectionsThis analysis explores how the role of the nation-state is rede ned in cosmopolitan theory, asserting that it is notthe sole source of democratic legitimacy. Instead, it highlights the need for a recon guration of power and authority,where no single decision-making center holds ultimate sovereignty. This perspective demands that democracy supportinstitutional legitimacy at all levels of governance, extending essential democratic values globally.Having explored the moral foundations of cosmopolitan democracy—egalitarian individualism, reciprocal recognition,and impartial treatment—the importance of their political implementation from a cosmopolitan viewpoint has beenestablished. Future research should explore further into these themes, considering the evolving nature of societiesand the new challenges these changes pose to the cosmopolitan ideal.This ongoing inquiry is vital, especially at a time when global shifts in civil liberties and political rights prompt areevaluation of how cosmopolitan democracy can adapt and remain relevant in changing international contexts. How to cite this articleLeyva, K. J. (2024, May 2). Rethinking Sovereignty: A Path to Cosmopolitan Democracy. Politics and RightsReview. https://politicsrights.com/rethinking-sovereignty-cosmopolitan-democracy/

Rethinking Sovereignty: A Path to Cosmopolitan Democracy

https://philpapers.org/archive/LEYRSA.pdf

Rethinking Sovereignty: A Path to Cosmopolitan Democracy

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

PhilPapers