Another Cosmopolitanism

by Seyla Benhabib, Robert Post (Editor)

In these two important lectures, distinguished political philosopher Seyla Benhabib argues that since the UN Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, we have entered a phase of global civil society which is governed by cosmopolitan norms of universal justice--norms which are difficult for some to accept as legitimate since they are sometimes in conflict with democratic ideals. In her first lecture, Benhabib argues that this tension can never be fully resolved, but it can be mitigated through the renegotiation of the dual commitments to human rights and sovereign self-determination. Her second lecture develops this idea in detail, with special reference to recent developments in Europe (for example, the banning of Muslim head scarves in France). The EU has seen the replacement of the traditional unitary model of citizenship with a new model that disaggregates the components of traditional citizenship, making it possible to be a citizen of multiple entities at the same time.

The volume also contains a substantive introduction by Robert Post, the volume editor, and contributions by Bonnie Honig (Northwestern University), Will Kymlicka (Queens University), and Jeremy Waldron (Columbia School of Law).

Genres: Politics, Nonfiction, Philosophy

224 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2006

About the author

Seyla Benhabib is a Turkish Jewish professor of political science and philosophy at Yale, and director of the program in Ethics, Politics, and Economics, and a well-known contemporary philosopher. She previously taught in the departments of philosophy at Boston University, SUNY Stony Brook, the New School for Social Research, and the Department of Government at Harvard University.

She is the author of several books, most notably about the philosophers Hannah Arendt and Jürgen Habermas. She has also worked with many important philosophers and scholars, including Herbert Marcuse. Benhabib is well known for combining critical theory with feminist theory.

Reviews

[Luis García Vela · Rating 4 out of 5]

“The conflict between sovereignty and hospitality has weakened in intensity but it has by no means been eliminated”. “We face a paradox internal to democracies: they cannot choose the boundaries of their own membership democratically”

Propuesta interesante: aunque no puedo evitar pensar que cae en el mismo rancio universalismo de siempre, es muy coherente. El hecho de considerar que el dilema leyes-ética nunca se va a poder solventar y que meta en su propuesta cosmopolita algo (por fin, ya tocaba) de conciencia de lo histórico me ha chocado. Creo que hace agujeros en algunas cosas y que tiene una foto de Kant en su despacho que besa cada mañana (en el ensayo le ha desgastado el nombre al pobre); pero aunque no esté de acuerdo me gusta la manera en que argumenta. ¿Cómo no va a haber una ciudadanía global -dice- si vivimos en la época en la que aceptamos los conceptos de crímenes de lesa humanidad?

Puntazo para Oxford por la edición: el meter las críticas de Waldron (hijo tienes buenas ideas pero tus artículos duermen), Honig (has hablado muy bien señora) y Kymlicka a la propuesta de Benhabib está muy bien. Además ella les responde a los tres en un artículo final (un beef académico realmente) y así uno se da cuenta de que nunca nadie va a tener la razón y que todo hace aguas por algún sitio. Pero bueno, a veces no está mal perder el tiempo pensando qué tiene menos fallos

[Berk Tuzuner · Rating 5 out of 5]

Before I start I must say I did not read it for any academic purpose, yet it was an horizon widening lecture for me. I am a corporate lawyer by training and unlike some colleauges I still have some interest for the intersection of humanities and law. During my years in law school, I studied public aspects of law (be it domestic public law or public international law) with great pleasure, but obviously I had to adopt a very strict legal methodology while studying them.

So reading how Benhabib approached legal concepts such as universal citizenship/constitutional law/asylum law and the concept of self determination was an enriching experience for me. Benhabib also sheds some light on how liberal and democratic values conflict when it comes to immigration policies. It is bold, yet enriching, especially for those of us who are blindened by strict legal postivisim.

[chawon · Rating 4 out of 5]

So good. Even in moments of disagreement (questions of political stability, identifying objects of trust, etc.), I found myself in deep appreciation for Prof. Benhabib's intellect. Such good writing too.

[Amr ElNashar · Rating 3 out of 5]

Writing style is incohesive and reads more like a bunch of essays than a book.

The author insists upon her own views rather than actually respond to the criticisms she has cited.

That's a shame because at its essence there is obvious value in her writings.

[Ft. Sheridan · Rating 3 out of 5]

Benhabib's response to Bonnie Honig is worth reading (as is Kymlicka's critique of SB), but the lectures themselves aren't that exciting.