Would it ever happen? Critical assessment of David Held's Cosmopolitan Democracy.

Questions on Democratic Politics

Would it ever happen? Critical assessment of David Held's Cosmopolitan Democracy.

Abstract
David Held built up the utophy of the cosmopolitan democracy, which is based on that globalization has gone too far, there is no way back only forward to a more integrated democracy on the global level, but is it relevant? Do we actually have to “worry” about this kind of integration? We cannot be sure about anything except the present, but what we can do is guessing the future, based on the present.

In this essay, I would like to help in understanding what the theory of cosmopolitan democracy is, what it is based on, who founded it and why? Why is it relevant to us in our globalized world?  Also, I would like to criticise it, looking at its negative aspects on the individual states, think critically about this utophy. What was told by Kant in the 19^th century (Lucas, 2017) and how David Held and others, like Mary Kaldor (CBE), Daniele Archibugi, or Richard Falk (contemporary cosmopolitan democracy theorists)? (Wikipedia, 2017) What is their concept of cosmopolitan system and how could it be operating, or if that is the case, why would they fail to govern the World?

First of all, then let us see what cosmopolitan democracy is, who founded it, what it is based on and why it is ‘good’. As a fact, cosmopolitan democracy is only a theory (yet), an utophy which – although Kant also had thoughts about a stronger union of states, but –  was actually becoming a case after the end of the cold war in the 1990’s, when the Western liberalism won and interstate/international associations were born or became more powerful and relevant as nearly all the world was part of it now as the Soviet Union has died (like the European Union, or a different, but the building of the International Space Station) (Wikipedia, 2017), but most importantly the globalization had more relevance and became faster, stronger and more tight between states around the World. After the Cold War period global questions like climate change, migration, terrorism, soon become more urgent than ever before and these are questions which cannot be solved by one state itself. So, soon, due to obvious connection – as it is known, these political actors overrule the local state level–it has become questioned, that these associations overrule the state sovereignty and nationality, some political thinkers – I dare to state, mainly David Held – started to talk about a democracy which is above states, this is the cosmopolitan democracy, which is based on that democracy and the rule of law can guide the international relations in the World (Wikipedia, 2017) and people are represented in the global government in global questions (Marchetti, 2011) as democracy is useless on the national level because the globalization has gone too far already.

Secondly, I would like to introduce and critically assess different views about cosmopolitan democracy by different contemporary political academics.

Mary Kaldor in Cosmopolitan Democracy talks about the European Union, which can be a sample as a more local ‘cosmopolitan’, European multinational democracy in a smaller unit than the full globalized World. She built up two possible future European orders after the Cold War order of Europe (Kaldor in Archibugi and Held 1995, pp. 84-94). “One is a combination of nations and bloc/nations (Model A). The other is a set of new horizontal international state structures, prefigured by the blocs but not based on the imaginary war legitimizing principle, combined with vertical territorially based, relatively small national units (Model B). They are, in a sense, worst-case and best-case models,…”. (Kaldor cited in Archibugi and Held, 1995, p. 84)

Table 1: Kaldor  in Archibugi and Held (1995) Cosmopolitan Democracy (An Agenda for a New World Order). Europe, Nation-States and Nationalism Cambridge: Polity Press, p.86

To put things straight, I would like to argue that these models – shown above on Table 1 – are unrealistic in a way that it is based on complete agreement between all the European countries either giving up or not giving up their nationality in order to achieve the complete European concept. Let us be honest, what if only one single country does not want to give up its nationality? The perfect example could be Brexit here, where national sovereignty was a reason for leaving, therefore I state that the current European order could be even more damaged if one or two countries leave because they do not want Model B. I think, the possibilities according to these two models are as follows: either all countries agree in Model A or B (then there is no problem), or most of them agree in Model B and some leave the Union because they prefer the concept of Model A, or most countries – keeping their national sovereignty – take part in Model A and those who would prefer Model B are less so they cannot force the majority to give up their nation-state position, so this way they lose their voice on Model B.

David Held, as an other multinational thinker went even further and in both, the Cosmopolitan Democracy (in Archibugi and Held, 1995, pp. 102-120) and his own book, the Models of Democracy (2006) he demonstrates the actual model of the cosmopolitan utophy with regional and global parliaments, even with both: short- and long-term political implications in possible transformations for this cosmopolitan order. In the former each country would elect its members in it and this would be legislative power above member states. The latter would be something but different from the UN as David Held criticises the UN system, how it gives formal equality for the member states in the General Assembly but in the Security Council it gives difference by population, so it is not democratic in the latter, it is a nonsense for him. So, this previously mentioned Global Parliament – according to Held – should work with 3 features: standard sitting body which sets up to nation-states, revenue saving and with global police and military forces. I agree with his point, which states that the members of the Regional Parliament are elected in the member-states, because looking at history, the European Union was originally widely thought to suffering from democratic deficits and the solution was that members of the European Parliament became elected by voters in member-states gave more democracy. (Buller, 2017) On the other hand, there are several key questions which are not answered by this model but these are indispensable for a system to be able to work. How would the legislative process work? One country-one vote or it would depend on the size of the state’s population? What about voting? Would it be unanimity or (qualified) majority voting? How would so many countries agree? Eventually, how would legislation be enforced? (Buller, 2017) These are all necessary to be answer in any working legislative system, but again, yet this is only an utophy.

Last but not least, looking at Daniel Archibugi and Richard Falk, the former also talks about the reform of the United Nations, but he rather focuses on its functioning in global governance than its structure as a problem. (Archibugi in Archibugi and Held, 1995, pp. 121-162) He questions that the UN kind of confederal constitution, which is based on the federal states would work in a world where the world is one state, also that a world state may not be democratic enough as, according to Rousseau democracy can only work in small communities. (Rousseau cited by Archibugi in Archibugi and Held, 1995, p. 133) Richard Falk brings up a completely different view, the role of civil societies and their challenge: the law of humanity but as I do not focus on the civil side of the scheme, I cannot explicate it in this essay but I strongly recommend reading it. (Falk cited in Archibugi and Held, 1995, pp. 163-179)

In a conclusion, I would like to conclude that although these schemes of the utophy of cosmopolitan democracy are based on fairly relevant things we are experiencing nowadays, all four writers build future on relevant globalization, I still would not look at cosmopolitan democracy as a relevant utophy yet, because there are many key facts showing that there is no transferring into anything like this. We can say, there is no any other organization or willingness to build something like the European Union. Although, there therefore I say there is no drastic steps forward a global democracy, global institutions, states still rather prefer their own national sovereignty than a common thing with other, if not all the states. If I would talk about some integration I would talk only about Europeanization, in my view at this point of time this is the only relevant integration, but here I would also like to state we still rather identify ourselves as British, Hungarian, Spanish, etc. not as European.

Here, against you may mention many world organizations we have, but I must say they are not for governing yet, they are only for the global issues – affecting the environment, human rights, peace, etc. –  which are we all, citizens of the world are responsible for.

To sum up, I must say if there will be anything likely to cosmopolitan democracy it is far enough from us to be relevant, there are no concrete further steps yet than we have (the UN, NATO, EU, etc.). National sovereignty is still the most important thing – just looking at the example of Brexit – but if there is a relevant integration than it is Europeanization, as today this is the only well-working system in this direction and we get deeper and deeper integrity by giving up our currency, borders, markets and investing in our poorer fellow states to make them more equal. Cosmopolitan democracy as it is may be a possible future, may not, we cannot be sure but I see it as one utophy which is not relevant (yet), as although things have changed after the Cold War, they in a way stopped changing and we do not have further strong steps towards cosmopolitan governance as it is, also we do not know if it would be compatible with democracy, the world as a state as a whole.

Bibliography

Archibugi, Daniel in Archibugi, D. and Held, D. (1995) Cosmopolitan Democracy (An Agenda for a New World Order). From the United nations to Cosmopolitan Democracy, 1^st edition, Cambridge: Polity Press, pp. 121-162

Falk, Richard in Archibugi, D. and Held, D. (1995) Cosmopolitan Democracy (An Agenda for a New World Order). The World Order between Inter-state Law and the Law of Humanity: The Role of Civil Society Institutions, 1^st edition, Cambridge: Polity Press, pp.

Buller, Jim (23/10/2017) Introduction to Democratic Politics Lecture 7: Globalization. Europeanization, and the Future of the Democratic State [lecture] University of York

Held, David in Archibugi, D. and Held, D. (1995) Cosmopolitan Democracy (An Agenda for a New World Order). Democracy and the International Order, 1^st edition, Cambridge: Polity Press, pp. 102-120

Held, David (2006) Models of Democracy. Democracy, the Nation-State and the Global System: Rethinking democracy for a more global age: the cosmopolitan model, 3^rd edition, Cambridge: Polity Press, pp. 304-309

Kaldor, Mary in Archibugi, D. and Held, D. (1995) Cosmopolitan Democracy (An Agenda for a New World Order). Europe, Nation-States and Nationalism, 1^st edition, Cambridge: Polity Press, p. 84

Kaldor, Mary in Archibugi, D. and Held, D. (1995) Cosmopolitan Democracy (An Agenda for a New World Order). Europe, Nation-States and Nationalism, 1^st edition, Cambridge: Polity Press, pp. 84-95

Lucas, Rob (unknown year) Immanuel Kant – Idea for a Universal History from a Cosmopolitan Point of View, Marxist Internet Archive [online] Available at: https://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/ethics/kant/universal-history.htm (accessed on: 12/12/2017)

Marchetti, Raffaelle (2011) Cosmopolitan Democracy, Encyclopedia of Global Justice [online] Available at: https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007%2F978-1-4020-9160-5_81 (accessed on 11/12/2017)

Rousseau, Jean-Jaques cited by Archibugi, D. in Archibugi, D. and Held, D. (1995) Cosmopolitan Democracy (An Agenda for a New World Order). From the United nations to Cosmopolitan Democracy, 1^st edition, Cambridge: Polity Press, p. 133

Wikipedia (2017) Cosmopolitan Democracy, Wikipedia [online] Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmopolitan_democracy (accessed on 11/12/2017)