Kant’s Perpetual Peace as a Manual for the Twenty-First Century?—Cosmopolitanism, Ethics, and the Role of the Individual in a Globalizing Society

Christian Hein
{"title":"Kant’s Perpetual Peace as a Manual for the Twenty-First Century?—Cosmopolitanism, Ethics, and the Role of the Individual in a Globalizing Society","authors":"Christian Hein","doi":"10.17265/1548-6605/2020.02.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"At the beginning of the 21st century, new variables, such as globalization and homogenization, international terrorism, and mass-migration have started to change the socio-political fabric of the world. The implications of these new circumstances have been discussed in several publications—most notably Seyla Benhabib’s study Dignity in Adversity, Žižek’s recent Against the Double Blackmail and Andreas Cassee’s philosophical essay “Globale Bewegungsfreiheit”. However, although they touch on the matters of cosmopolitanism, migration, and the issue of human rights, I want to go back to Kant’s programmatic essay “Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch” and what defines it as a viable concept for the future. The migration crisis of 2015 has put categories, such as hospitality, human rights, ethics, and cosmopolitanism in a new perspective. Picking up Kant’s category of hospitality, the German government decided to admit a large number of refugees into Germany. The reactions within the country and internationally were mixed. Nevertheless, this sudden influx of human individuals has led to a discussion of the applicability of Kant’s concept of unlimited global mobility and its basis in reality. It furthermore raised the question whether Kant’s essay is merely a product of a naive idealism. A deeper analysis of Kant’s socio-political objective and its connection to his critical writings will be necessary to understand the significance of his essay in the 21st century. Thus, the question I want to ask is whether Kant’s Perpetual Peace could indeed be a viable model for the new age. Hence, I will analyze his sketch by using an alternative approach focusing on the (usually neglected) rationality of his seemingly idealist vision—namely, as blueprint for a flexible system that can counterbalance socio-cultural/socio-political change and (only through that/a transformative/transforming quality) stabilize the/a global(ized/izing) society and, therefore, achieve a state of perpetual peace based on the prerequisite of rational thinking which accounts for all possible (new) circumstances and variables that might destabilize the balance of powers and require a new ethical and political framework for a new Lebenswelt. The role of the individual in this scenario will be examined and, moreover, what consequences a transformed ethical reference system could have for the validity and applicability of human rights on a global scale.","PeriodicalId":57290,"journal":{"name":"美中法律评论:英文版","volume":"17 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"美中法律评论:英文版","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17265/1548-6605/2020.02.001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

At the beginning of the 21st century, new variables, such as globalization and homogenization, international terrorism, and mass-migration have started to change the socio-political fabric of the world. The implications of these new circumstances have been discussed in several publications—most notably Seyla Benhabib’s study Dignity in Adversity, Žižek’s recent Against the Double Blackmail and Andreas Cassee’s philosophical essay “Globale Bewegungsfreiheit”. However, although they touch on the matters of cosmopolitanism, migration, and the issue of human rights, I want to go back to Kant’s programmatic essay “Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch” and what defines it as a viable concept for the future. The migration crisis of 2015 has put categories, such as hospitality, human rights, ethics, and cosmopolitanism in a new perspective. Picking up Kant’s category of hospitality, the German government decided to admit a large number of refugees into Germany. The reactions within the country and internationally were mixed. Nevertheless, this sudden influx of human individuals has led to a discussion of the applicability of Kant’s concept of unlimited global mobility and its basis in reality. It furthermore raised the question whether Kant’s essay is merely a product of a naive idealism. A deeper analysis of Kant’s socio-political objective and its connection to his critical writings will be necessary to understand the significance of his essay in the 21st century. Thus, the question I want to ask is whether Kant’s Perpetual Peace could indeed be a viable model for the new age. Hence, I will analyze his sketch by using an alternative approach focusing on the (usually neglected) rationality of his seemingly idealist vision—namely, as blueprint for a flexible system that can counterbalance socio-cultural/socio-political change and (only through that/a transformative/transforming quality) stabilize the/a global(ized/izing) society and, therefore, achieve a state of perpetual peace based on the prerequisite of rational thinking which accounts for all possible (new) circumstances and variables that might destabilize the balance of powers and require a new ethical and political framework for a new Lebenswelt. The role of the individual in this scenario will be examined and, moreover, what consequences a transformed ethical reference system could have for the validity and applicability of human rights on a global scale.
康德的《永恒的和平》是二十一世纪的手册吗--世界主义、伦理与全球化社会中的个人角色
21世纪初,全球化和同质化、国际恐怖主义和大规模移民等新的变量开始改变世界的社会政治结构。这些新情况的含义已经在一些出版物中讨论过——最著名的是Seyla Benhabib的研究《逆境中的尊严》,Žižek最近的《反对双重勒索》和Andreas Cassee的哲学论文《全球的Bewegungsfreiheit》。然而,尽管他们触摸世界主义的问题,移民,和人权的问题,我想回到康德的编程的文章“永久和平:一个哲学素描”,它定义了什么对未来作为一个可行的概念。2015年的移民危机将好客、人权、道德和世界主义等类别置于一个新的视角。德国政府继承了康德的好客范畴,决定接纳大量难民进入德国。国内和国际上的反应不一。然而,人类个体的突然涌入引发了对康德无限全球流动概念的适用性及其现实基础的讨论。这进一步提出了康德的论文是否仅仅是朴素唯心主义的产物的问题。深入分析康德的社会政治目标及其与他的批判著作的联系,对于理解他的文章在21世纪的意义是必要的。因此,我想问的问题是,康德的“永久和平”是否真的可以成为新时代的可行模式。因此,我将使用另一种方法来分析他的草图,重点关注他看似理想主义的愿景的合理性(通常被忽视)——也就是说,作为一个灵活系统的蓝图,可以抵消社会文化/社会政治变革,并(只有通过这种/变革/转变的品质)稳定/全球化的/化的社会,因此,实现以理性思维为前提的永久和平状态,这种理性思维考虑到可能破坏权力平衡的所有可能(新)情况和变数,并要求为新的生存空间建立新的道德和政治框架。将审查个人在这种情况下的作用,此外,还将审查改变后的道德参照制度对人权在全球范围内的有效性和适用性可能产生的后果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
609
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书