Event Title

Cosmopolitanism vs. Nationalism: Solidarity, Practicality, and Legitimacy in the World of Nation-States

Location

Diamond 241

Start Date

1-5-2014 10:00 AM

End Date

1-5-2014 11:00 AM

Project Type

Presentation- Restricted to Campus Access

Description

A constant in the modern era is the assumption that regimes, legitimate and illegitimate, represent distinct nation-states. These nation-states have become the assumed natural condition for a state, and a necessary precondition for legitimacy through democracy. Weighing the moral benefits and detriments of the nation-state model is becoming more difficult as globalization and multiculturalism take their toll on a system not designed to deal with them. However, the hybridization of the words nation and state, along with concepts related to them, have become increasingly muddled and interchangeable. In direct opposition to nationalism, cosmopolitanism holds that states descriptively can and normatively should be founded on some basis other than ethnonationality, and should be linked together with world-wide structures. I examine the competition between the two from a theory perspective, relying especially on Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Jrgen Habermas, to examine both the possibility and desirability of ethnonationalism and non-nationalistic means of creating a state. In examining the benefits and pitfalls of both, I seek to describe what would characterize what solidarity and related values would serve as the substrate for the best state possible.

Faculty Sponsor

Sandy Maisel

Sponsoring Department

Colby College. Government Dept.

CLAS Field of Study

Social Sciences

Event Website

http://www.colby.edu/clas

ID

481

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS
 
May 1st, 10:00 AM May 1st, 11:00 AM

Cosmopolitanism vs. Nationalism: Solidarity, Practicality, and Legitimacy in the World of Nation-States

Diamond 241

A constant in the modern era is the assumption that regimes, legitimate and illegitimate, represent distinct nation-states. These nation-states have become the assumed natural condition for a state, and a necessary precondition for legitimacy through democracy. Weighing the moral benefits and detriments of the nation-state model is becoming more difficult as globalization and multiculturalism take their toll on a system not designed to deal with them. However, the hybridization of the words nation and state, along with concepts related to them, have become increasingly muddled and interchangeable. In direct opposition to nationalism, cosmopolitanism holds that states descriptively can and normatively should be founded on some basis other than ethnonationality, and should be linked together with world-wide structures. I examine the competition between the two from a theory perspective, relying especially on Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Jrgen Habermas, to examine both the possibility and desirability of ethnonationalism and non-nationalistic means of creating a state. In examining the benefits and pitfalls of both, I seek to describe what would characterize what solidarity and related values would serve as the substrate for the best state possible.

http://digitalcommons.colby.edu/clas/2014/program/198