This article examines the role of states in Kantian cosmopolitanism and seeks to
clarify the relationship between the rights of states and the concept of
cosmopolitan law. The argument is made that states play an important
role within Kantian theory, but that the concept of absolute sovereignty is also
ultimately rejected. The article examines the Kantian argument for domestic
right, international right and cosmopolitan right, and
provides an alternative view of these conceptions against the argument that
Kantianism involves the removal of states and the creation of an overarching global
government. It establishes that Kantian cosmopolitanism provides a normative ethical
global order without the existence of a world government. From this discussion, the
relevance of Kantian cosmopolitanism is also examined in relation to contemporary
International Relations theory.
Anderson-Gold, Sharon
(2001) Cosmopolitanism and Human Rights.
Cardiff: University of Wales Press
.
2.
Archibugi, Daniele
and
David Held
(1995) Cosmopolitan Democracy: An Agenda for a New World
Order.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
.
3.
Axinn, Sidney
(1998)
‘Kant on World Government,’
in
G. Funke
and
T. Seebohm
(eds) Proceedings of the Sixth International Kantian
Congress, Vol. 2, pp.
243-251
. Washington, DC: University Press of America.
4.
Barry, Brian
(1999) ‘International Society from a
Cosmopolitan Perspective’, in
D. Maple
and
T. Nardin
(eds) International Society, pp. 144-163.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press
.
5.
Beitz, Charles
(1979) Political Theory and International Relations.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press
.
6.
Bull, Hedley
(1977) The Anarchical Society.
New York: Columbia University Press
.
7.
Cavallar, Georg
(1999) Kant and the Theory and Practice of International
Right.
Cardiff: University of Wales Press
.
8.
Covell, Charles
(1998) Kant and the Law of Peace: A Study in the Philosophy
of International Law and International Relations.
New York: Palgrave Publishers
.
9.
Donaldson, Thomas
(1992) ‘Kant’s Global
Rationalism’, in
D. Mapel
and
T. Nardin
(eds) Traditions of International Ethics, pp.
136-158.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
.
10.
and 12(4):
323-353
.
11.
Fidler, David
(1996) ‘Desperately Clinging to Grotian and
Kantian Sheep: Rousseau’s Attempt to Escape from the State of
War’, in
I. Clarks
and
I. Neumann
(eds) Classical Theories of International Relations.
Baingstoke: Macmillan Press
.
12.
Flikschuh, Katrin
(2000) Kant and Modern Political Philosophy.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
.
13.
Franceschet, Antonio
(2002) Kant and Liberal Internationalism: Sovereignty,
Justice and Global Reform.
New York: Pelgrave
.
14.
Franck, Thomas M.
(1990) The Power of Legitimacy Among Nations.
Oxford: Oxford University Press
.
15.
Gregor, Mary
(1988) ‘Kant’s Approach to
Constitutionalism’, in
A. Rosenbaum
(ed.) Constitutionalism: The Philosophical Dimension, pp.
69-87.
New York: Greenwood Press
.
16.
Heater, Derek
(2002) World Citizenship.
London: Continuum
.
17.
Hegel, G.W.F.
(1821) The Philosophy of Right, trans. S.W. Dyde.
New York: Prometheus Books
, 1996.
18.
Held, David
(1995) Democracy and the Global Order.
Cambridge: Polity Press
.
19.
Hinsley, F.H.
(1963) Power and the Pursuit of Peace.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
.
20.
Holsti, Kalevi J.
(1992) Peace and War: Armed Conflicts and International Order
1648-1989.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
.
21.
Hurrell, Andrew
(1990)
‘Kant and the Kantian Paradigm in International Relations’
, Review of International Studies16(3):
183-205
.
22.
Kant, Immanuel
(1784a) ‘The Idea of a Universal History with a
Cosmopolitan Purpose’, in
H. Reiss
(ed.) Kant’s Political Writings, pp.
41-53.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
, 1970.
23.
Kant, Immanuel
(1784b) ‘An Answer to the Question: What is
Enlightenment?’, in
H. Reiss
(ed.) Kant’s Political Writings, pp.
54-61.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
, 1970.
24.
Kant, Immanuel
(1787) Appendix, ‘Transcendental Logic II, Dialectic, I,
Ideas in General’, in J.M.D. Meiklejohn (trans.) The
Critique of Pure Reason.
New York: The Colonial Press
, 1900.
25.
Kant, Immanuel
(1793) ‘On the Common Saying: This May be True in Theory,
but it does not Apply in Practice’, in
H. Reiss
(ed.) Kant’s Political Writings, pp.
61-87.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
, 1970.
26.
Kant, Immanuel
(1795) ‘Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical
Sketch’, in
H. Reiss
(ed.) Kant’s Political Writings, pp.
93-131.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
, 1970.
27.
Kant, Immanuel
(1797) The Metaphysics of Morals,
M. Gregor
(ed.).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
, 1996.
28.
Laberge, Pierre
(1998) ‘Kant on Justice and the Law of
Nations’, in
D. Maple
and
T. Nardin
(eds) International Society: Diverse Ethical Perspectives, pp.
82-102.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press
.
29.
Linklater, Andrew
(1990) Men and Citizens in the Theory of International
Relations.
Basingstoke: Macmillan
.
30.
Lutz-Bachmann, Matthias
(1997) ‘Kant’s Ideal of Peace and the
Philosophical Conceptions of a World Republic’, in
J. Bohman
and
M. Lutz-Bachmann
(eds) Perpetual Peace: Essays on Kant’s Cosmopolitan
Ideal, pp. 59-77.
Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press
.
31.
Oneal, John
and
Bruce Russett
(1999)
‘The Kantian Peace: The Pacific Benefits of Democracy,
Interdependence, and International Organizations, 1885-1992’
, World Politics52:
1-37
.
32.
Pogge, Thomas
(1988)
‘Kant’s Theory of Justice’
, Kant-Studien79:
407-433
.
33.
Rummel, R.J.
(1999)
‘Democracies ARE Less Warlike Than Other Regimes’
, European Journal of International Relations1(4):
429-456
.
34.
Tennyson, Alfred Lord
(1891) ‘Locksley Hall’, in
Works.
London: Macmillan
.
35.
Teson, Fernando
(1998a) ‘Kantian International
Liberalism’, in
D. Maple
and
T. Nardin
(eds) International Society: Diverse Ethical Perspectives, pp.
103-113.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press
.
36.
Teson, Fernando
(1998b) A Philosophy of International Law.
Boulder, CO: Westview Press
.
37.
Wight, Martin
(1987)
‘An Anatomy of International Thought’
, Review of International Studies13:
221-227
.
38.
Wolff, Christian
(1749) The Laws of Nations Treated According to a Scientific
Method, trans. H. Drake.
Oxford: Clarendon Press
, 1934.
