This event took place on the 15th of November, 16.00-18.00, Council Room, Faculty of Sociology and Social Work (Schitu Măgureanu. nr.9), sector 5, Bucharest.
”This project is a development of my previous research on cosmopolitanism from below, which addressed the criticism against the idea of a cosmopolitan institution claiming that cosmopolitans fail to provide an account of the agency who will bring world institutions into being, relying implicitly on the idea of an enlightened sovereign that will impose cosmopolitan institutions from above. To reject this criticism, the project examined institutional experimentations practised by global social movements, mapped the institutional ideas emerging from the bottom up and theorized cosmopolitan institutions in terms of critique, practice, and transformation. However, a plurality of institutional experimentations with a cosmopolitan intent is not enough for a coherent cosmopolitics and a cosmopolitan political philosophy. The global social movements cannot adequately pursue their visions in the absence of a cosmopolitan law and a cosmopolitan world institution/state. Migrant activists, in spite of radicalism of their claims ‘No One Is Illegal’ or ‘No borders, No nation,’ end up requesting legalization or citizenship in a nation-state or another, while some of the participants at the World Social Forum do not get visas to attend the WSF summits held in different countries under the motto ‘Another World is Possible’. However, this is not the fault of social movements, but of political philosophers reluctant to think politics beyond the frame of the nation-state and to extend the limits of political imagination. Cosmopolitans, for the coherence of their arguments and if they are interested in seeing their principles realized, have to argue for a world state. Thus, this project examines the reluctance of political philosophy to take into consideration the idea of a world state (apparently legitimized by the Kantian warning against the world state as a global Leviathan), rejects a range of common critiques of the world state itself, and argues that refusal to take seriously the idea of world state makes political philosophy outdated for the current global realities.”