Abstract
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.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Kant 1996, op.cit., p. 235.
Kant, op.cit., p. 249, bold added.
Kant, op.cit., p. 248.
Kant, op.cit., p. 248.
Holland had a flourishing commercial interregnum in the seventeenth century, but Dutch is not one of the top 10 languages with the larger number of speakers. Portuguese is in seventh place, above Italian and French, and below Arabic and Bengali.
Toulmin, op.cit., p. 133.
Toulmin, op.cit., p. 133.
Toulmin, op.cit., p. 133.
Crimes that have been covered in velvet and shoveled out of the main stream, by the beautifully written and well advertised essay Cosmopolitanism. Ethics in a World of Strangers, by Kwame Anthony Appiah (Appiah 2006).
Guaman Poma de Ayala Nueva Corónica y buen Gobierno was finished in 1516, presumably composed during a period of two decades. See de Ayala (1985).
See Abraham Ortelius’s world map (Ortelius 1570).
Anghie, op.cit., p. 102, emphasis added.
Anghie, op.cit., p. 103. emphasis added.
References
Anghie, A. (1999). Francisco de Vitoria and the colonial origins of international law. In E. Darian-Smith & P. Fitzpatrick (Eds.), Laws of the postcolonial (pp. 89–108). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Appiah, K. A. (2006). Cosmopolitanism. Ethics in a world of strangers. New York: W.W. Norton.
Boroujerdi, M. (1996). Iranian intellectuals and the West—The tormented triumph of nativism. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press.
Chatterjee, P. (2004). The politics of the governed. Reflections on popular politics in most of the world. New York: Columbia University Press.
de Ayala, F. G. P. (1985). Nueva Corónica y Buen Gobierno ([1617], 1985). In J. V. Murra & R. Adorno (Eds.). México: Fondo de Cultura Económica.
de Vitoria, F. (1532/1989). Relectio de Indis. Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas.
Fanon, F. (1963). The wretched of the earth (Constance Farrington, Trans.). New York: Grove Press.
Grosfóguel, R. (2008). Transmodernity, border thinking, and global coloniality. Decolonizing political economy and postcolonial studies. In Eurozine; http://www.eurozine.com/articles/2008-07-04-grosfoguel-en.html.
Kant, I. (1996). Anthropology from a pragmatic point of view (Victor Lyle Dowdell, Trans.). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
Mignolo, W. D. (2000). The many faces of cosmo-polis: Border thinking and critical cosmopolitanism. Public Culture, 12(3), 721–748.
Ortelius, A. (1570). Typus Orbis Terrarum. http://nla.gov.au/nla.map-rm2044.
Steger, M. (2006). Globalism. Market ideology meets terrorism. New York: Rowman and Littlefield.
Toulmin, S. (1990). Cosmopolis. The hidden agenda of modernity. New York: Free Press.
Weik, A. (2007). “The uses, hazards of expatriation”: Richard Wright’s cosmopolitanism in process. African American Review, 41, 459–475.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mignolo, W. Cosmopolitanism and the De-colonial Option. Stud Philos Educ 29, 111–127 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-009-9163-1
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-009-9163-1