Debating Globalization: Cosmopolitanism and Communitarianism as Political Ideologies

Abstract

Economic, cultural, and political systems formerly bounded by the borders of nation-states are increasingly globalized. Politicians, civil society and other societal actors engage in publically debating issues related to globalization. Whether conflicts consolidate to form a stable cleavage depends among other factors on the extent to which they become ideologically underpinned. As the basis for such an underpinning, we identify philosophical debates about justice between globalists and statists and between universalists and contextualists as raw material that political entrepreneurs active in the public sphere can draw upon. On this basis, we identify four major bones of contention that could provide the core of such ideological underpinning: the permeability of borders; the allocation of authority between levels; the normative dignity of communities; and the patterns of justification. One ideal typical combination of those four components can be labeled cosmopolitanism – combining arguments from globalists and universalists; another communitarianism, combining statist and contextualist arguments. The more these two ideal types feature as political ideologies in public debate, the more debates about globalization solidify into a new cleavage. We develop a conceptual framework which can subsequently be used in support of empirical research analyzing the ideological foundations of globalization conflicts.

Keywords: Communitarianism, Cosmopolitanism, Globalization, Political Ideology, Political Theory, Public Sphere