Cosmopolitanism: Realism And Liberalism

1595 Words7 Pages
Statement of the Thesis
Cosmopolitanism explores what democracy is and how it can be applied in local, national and the global level. Realism on the other hand is a school of International Relations theory based on the concepts of anarchy and power politics. In this paper I will examine the realist’s views upon cosmopolitanism and specifically the model of federalism and I will argue that realists believe that the possibility of a future associated with a form of a global polity is a utopian idea rather than something feasible mainly due to the way the world is working.
Analysis and Explanation of Thesis
Beginning the analysis of my thesis I should first define Democracy in order to link it with the idea of a global polity. For this I will
…show more content…
In this quote, the realist’s position is confirmed. Indeed the antagonism in international relations currently exists in high percentages. Power politics and interests rather than democratic views are the driving forces of the word. Quoting Lord and Harris (2006) “the main criticism of cosmopolitanism is that its civilizing project presumes a degree of universality which is far from present at the global level and its morally contestable whether it should be”. Concluding this first part of explaining my thesis on why realists are against the idea of global polity and they don’t see it as a viable or practical plan at least not based on current political situation, I will now present arguments in support of why global polity can not…show more content…
A world government though is more likely to instead of taking care the public rights to be driven by its own interests. Therefore the true nature of the democracy of a global polity is likely a utopian idea as well. The national interests are stronger and we have seen by many examples of the current international politics that remain priority something that realists supports as well. It would highly unlikely for a government to prioritize global interests rather than national making the creation of a global polity practically inconceivable. Furthermore, would creating one authoritarian organisation enable democracy or rather destroy it? Would reducing the political actors be a democratization practice after all? We can see where the argument of not desirability enters along with non-feasibility. Last but not least as Archibugi (1998) reasons in the book ‘Re-Imagining Political Community: Studies In Cosmopolitan Democracy’ “there is no actual guarantee that the greater coordination in world politics will be informed by the values of

More about Cosmopolitanism: Realism And Liberalism

Open Document