Cosmopolitan justice and the league of democracies

Pasternak, Avia

doi:10.1080/13698230.2012.727310

Cited by 19 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One might object here that a path involving an arrangement like the League of Democracies represents a more inclusive and democratic alternative to the hegemonic path (Pasternak, 2012). And if such an alternative is, in fact, feasible, then that weakens the moral case for the hegemonic path.…”

Section: The Unequal Distribution Of Power Objectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In Buchanan (2007, p. 63); Valentini makes a similar, although less elaborated point in Valentini (2011). 14 For an account of cosmopolitan transition that takes this consideration seriously, see Pasternak (2012). Pasternak's account is congenial to our own to the extent that it also sees states (and democratic states in particular) as the key agents of the transition.…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cosmopolitanism and unipolarity: the theory of hegemonic transition

Belic¹,

Miklósi²

2020

Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosoph

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cosmopolitans typically argue that the realization of cosmopolitan ideals requires the creation of global political institutions of some kind. While the precise nature of the necessary institutions is widely discussed, the problem of the transition to such an order has received less attention. In this paper, we address what we take to be a crucial aspect of the problem of transition: we argue that it involves a moral coordination problem because there are several morally equivalent paths to reform the existing order, but suitably placed and properly motivated political agents need to converge on a single route for the transition to be successful. It is, however, unclear how such a convergence can take place since the duty to create global institutions does not single out any coordination point. We draw on the so-called theory of hegemonic stability to address this problem and conceptualize what we call the hegemonic transition. From an explanatory point of view, we rely on the theory's insights to explain how a hegemon may contribute to the creation of a rules-based international order by providing salient coordination points and accordingly, enabling coordination among states. From the normative point of view, we identify necessary conditions for the hegemonic transition to be morally permissible. To the extent that these conditions obtain, other states have pro tanto moral reasons to follow the salient coordination point provided by the leading state.

show abstract

Section: The Unequal Distribution Of Power Objectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cosmopolitanism and unipolarity: the theory of hegemonic transition

Belic¹,

Miklósi²

2020

Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosoph

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…-we currently do not agree, at either the academic or political level, upon either domestic or global political principles. In order to answer that question, I want to draw on Pasternak's recent discussion of the idea of a 'league of democracies' (Pasternak, 2012). The argument here is that our primary goal, in terms of international reform, should be for mature liberal democracies to construct their own governance framework, rather than diluting that framework, in terms of regulatory bite, and from the point of view of liberal values, in order to include everyone else.…”

Section: Normative Behaviourism and (Realistic) Global Political Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Normative behaviourism and global political principles

Floyd

2016

Journal of International Political Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article takes a new idea, 'normative behaviourism', and applies it to global political theory, in order to address at least one of the problems we might have in mind when accusing that subject of being too 'unrealistic'. The core of this idea is that political principles can be justified, not just by patterns in our thinking, and in particular our intuitions and considered judgements, but also by patterns in our behaviour, and in particular acts of insurrection and crime. The problem addressed is 'cultural relativism', understood here not as a meta-ethical doctrine, but as the apparent 'fact' that people around the world have culturally varying intuitions and judgements of a kind that lead them to affirm different political principles. This is a problem because it seems to follow (1) that global agreement on any substantial set of political principles is impossible, and (2) that any political theory in denial of this 'fact' would be, for that reason, deeply unrealistic. The solution argued for here is that, if domestic political principles (i.e. principles intended to regulate a single state) could be justified by normative behaviourism, and in reference to culturally invariant behaviour, then an international system supportive of such principles is justifiable by extension.

show abstract

Duties of Whom? States and the Problem of Global Justice

Vaha¹

2014

New Waves in Global Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cosmopolitan justice and the league of democracies

Cited by 19 publications

References 27 publications

Cosmopolitanism and unipolarity: the theory of hegemonic transition

Cosmopolitanism and unipolarity: the theory of hegemonic transition

Normative behaviourism and global political principles

Duties of Whom? States and the Problem of Global Justice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About