Abstract
Global Justice has typically been understood to mean institutional and social justice (political and redistributive issues on a global scale). In contrast, issues involving national and cultural identities are usually marginal in reflections on global justice. This occurs despite the fact that human rights include political, social and cultural rights. This paper links a conception of global justice, moral cosmopolitanism, with plurinational democracies. After giving a brief description of moral cosmopolitanism (Sect. 22.2), I go on to analyse notions of cosmopolitanism and patriotism in Kant’s work (Sect. 22.3) and the political significance that the notion of “unsocial sociability” and the “Ideas of Pure Reason” of Kant’s first Critique have for cosmopolitanism (Sect. 22.4). Finally, I analyse the relationship between cosmopolitanism and minority nations based on the preceding sections. I postulate the need for a moral and institutional refinement of democracies and international society that is better able to accommodate national pluralism than has so far been achieved by traditional liberal constitutionalism and cosmopolitanism (Sect. 22.5).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
I do not develop this point here. See Caney (2005: Chaps. 3–5).
- 3.
- 4.
P. Kleingeld posits a third type of patriotism in Kant’s work, “trait-based patriotism” (Kleingeld 2003: 305). Despite the analytical plausibility of her arguments, I believe that the main types of patriotism in Kant are the other two (civic and national). The third type is linked to the second and can be subsumed within it. I will omit here this third type of patriotism.
- 5.
For a criticism of the Esperanto-concept of “constitutional patriotism,” see Requejo (2005b: 97–100).
- 6.
On this point, I concur with P. Kleingeld’s analysis (2001: 311–314).
- 7.
The performance of tragedies, as Aristotle saw, is always accompanied by understanding the characters and by the fear that the action arouses in the audience. Shakespeare situated this plurality of motives within his characters. We are morally trapped inside ourselves, and outside, there is nothing else.
- 8.
I think that Kantian cosmopolitism is more fruitful than remaining in the Rousseauian perspective of “constitutional patriotisms,” “communities of dialogue” or the renewed faith in “deliberative politics.” In this sense, I believe that Kant’s work is more politically fruitful if it is understood as a key point within the Montaigne-Shakespeare-Hobbes-Hume-Kant-Berlin-Taylor line of reasoning than in that of Rousseau-Kant-Marx-Habermas.
- 9.
Kant, Critique of Pure Reason, B 395 note (Kant 1997: 407, note); Reason orders (B 671) (Kant 1997: 590), regulates (B 672) (Kant 1997: 591) and plans (B 814, B 730) (Kant 1997: 667 and 622). It does not work only “at dusk,” after knowledge, but precedes it, regulates it and directs it (B 708) (Kant 1997: 610f.). The philosopher is the “legislator of Reason, not its creator” (B 867) (Kant 1997: 695). Here there is a kind of “Kantian revenge”: Kant could say to Hegel and Marx that “precisely because you show “reason” when you criticise me, you have to return to me.”
- 10.
Kant, Critique of Pure Reason, A VII (Kant 1997: 99). In Idea for a Universal History, Kant clearly states: “Since men neither pursue their aims purely by instinct, as the animals do, nor act in accordance with an integral, prearranged plan like rational cosmopolitans, it would appear that no law-governed history of mankind is possible (as it would be, for example, with bees or beavers)” (VIII: 17) (Kant 1970: 41f.).
- 11.
- 12.
- 13.
Requejo (2005a), Final remark.
- 14.
The Spanish painter Francisco de Goya (1746–1828), a contemporary of Kant, expressed the same idea in the painting “The Dreams of Reason Engender Monsters.”
- 15.
Kant, Critique of Pure Reason, B 421 (Kant 1997: 452f.).
- 16.
Kant, Critique of Pure Reason, B 386 (Kant 1997: 434f.).
- 17.
In recent years, I have defended the possibilities of federal models to achieve this objective. Not all these models are equally effective. Normally, minority nations will not be politically accommodated unless they have at their disposal specific constitutional recognition and a singular position through techniques of asymmetric federalism. See Requejo (2005a: Chaps. 3 and 4).
Bibliography
Berlin, I. 1998. My intellectual path. New York Review of Books, May 14.
Caney, S. 2005. Justice beyond borders. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kant, I. 1970. Idea for a universal history with a cosmopolitan purpose. In Political writings, ed. H.S. Reiss, 41–53. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kant, I. 1997. Critique of pure reason. In The Cambridge companion, ed. P. Guyer and A. Wood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kleingeld, P. 2003. Kant’s cosmopolitan patriotism. Kant-Studien 94: 299–316.
Maíz, R., and F. Requejo (eds.). 2005. Democracy, nationalism and multiculturalism. London/New York: Routledge.
Parekh, B. 2000. Rethinking multiculturalism. Cultural diversity and political theory. London: Macmillan.
Pogge, Th. 1994. Cosmopolitanism and sovereignty. In Political restructuring in Europe: Ethical perspectives, ed. C. Brown, 85–118. London: Routledge.
Requejo, F. (ed.). 2001. Democracy and national pluralism. London/New York: Routledge.
Requejo, F. 2005a. Multinational federalism and value pluralism. London/New York: Routledge.
Requejo, F. 2005b. Multinational, not ‘postnational’, federalism. In Democracy, nationalism and multiculturalism, ed. R. Maíz and F. Requejo, 96–107. London/New York: Routledge.
Taylor, Ch. 1992. The politics of recognition. In Multiculturalism and the “Politics of recognition”, ed. A. Guttman and Ch Taylor, 25–74. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Tully, J. 1994. Strange multiplicity. Constitutionalism in an age of diversity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Requejo, F. (2013). Cosmopolitan Justice and Minority Rights: The Case of Minority Nations (or Kant Again, but Different). In: Merle, JC. (eds) Spheres of Global Justice. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5998-5_22
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5998-5_22
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-5997-8
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-5998-5
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)