A cosmopolitan instrumentalist theory of secession

Existing theories of the moral right to unilateral secession mostly fall into one of three groups. Remedial theories hold that there is a right to secede from a state that badly violates human rights. Associationist theories hold that any group that desires to rule itself has a right to secede. Ascriptivist theories hold that nations — groups that share an encompassing culture — have a right to secede. 1 In this paper I describe and defend a neglected fourth alternative theory. This theory holds that a group has a right to secede only if secession would lead to more cosmopolitan justice. This is a theory that many cosmopolitans are already committed to, albeit typically without realizing or acknowledging it. It is also the theory that cosmopolitans ought to be committed to, even if they are not so committed. And so the theory is interesting in two ways. First, it is compelling, especially for theorists with certain other commitments. Second, it sharpens our understanding of what a commitment to cosmopolitanism entails, and perhaps serves as a reductio against cosmopolitanism to the extent that the theory is not compelling. So, both supporters and opponents of this theory of secession should find its elucidation illuminating. In section 1 I briefly cover the main existing theories of secession and describe the cosmopolitan instrumentalist alternative. In section 2 I explain why cosmopolitans ought to accept the cosmopolitan instrumentalist theory of secession. In section 3 I explain why we should find the cosmopolitan instrumentalist approach attractive. Section 4 addresses objections and section 5 concludes.