Studies in Philosophy and Education

, Volume 29, Issue 2, pp 111–127

Cosmopolitanism and the De-colonial Option


DOI: 10.1007/s11217-009-9163-1

Cite this article as:
Mignolo, W. Stud Philos Educ (2010) 29: 111. doi:10.1007/s11217-009-9163-1


What are the differences between cosmopolitanism and globalization? Are they “natural” historical processes or are they designed for specific purposes? Was Kant cosmopolitanism good for the entire population of the globe or did it respond to a particular Eurocentered view of what a cosmo-polis should be? The article argues that, while the term “globalization” in the most common usage refers and correspond to neo-liberal globalization projects and ambitions (roughly from 1980 to 2008), and the Kantian concept of “cosmopolitanism” responded to the second wave (XVIII and XIX of European global expansion), “de-colonial cosmopolitanism” refers to global processes and conceptualizations delinking from both neo-liberal globalization and liberal cosmopolitan ideals. But it delinks also from theological and Marxist visions of a homogenous world center around religious ideals or state socialist regulations. De-colonial cosmopolitanism is a cosmopolitanism of multiple trajectories aiming at a trans-modern world based on pluriversality rather than on a new and good universal for all.


Coloniality Decoloniality Modern/colonial world Modernity/coloniality Our modernity and their modernity Modernity as an Eurocentered and imperial narrative 

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Duke UniversityDurhamUSA

Personalised recommendations