Search results

It is no big secret that in our world of great economic inequalities, belonging to somepolitical communities is just more valuable than belonging to others. And this divide is exactlywhat differentiates contemporary "unwoken" cosmopolitans into two categories – the touristand the migrant. In a certain way, both of those ideal figures embody cosmopolitan values ofearlier times, as they are "transgressing" the political borders of communities. Although boththe tourist and the migrant with their transgressions are helping the intercommunal exchangeand understanding between the peoples, their societal acceptance is wildly different. Whiletourists are rarely unwelcomed, mainly because they do not interact profoundly with domesticpopulation as they intend to return to their point of origin, migrants with their wish for "deeperconnections" are viewed with suspicion, if not outright hatred. And this difference stronglyputs into question the principle of hospitality, which is, following the work of ImmanuelKant, considered a basic building block of modern cosmopolitan theory. Finally, this paperwill try to make case that for the true cosmopolitan ideals to take hold, there is a need for areformulation of the current idea of hospitality, from the one based on the economy towardsthe one based on humanistic ideals. And this need is especially more pressing considering theturn of events provoked by the global pandemic, which are strengthening and slowly closingthe borders between our countries and each other.

Povijesna isprepletenost ideje kozmopolitizma i imperija duga je i seže sve do antičkih vremena. Sama ideja kozmopolitizma teško da bi se razvila u obliku kakvom je danas poznajemo da prvotno nije postojala politička organizacija poput imperija koja je pružila podlogu za njeno osmišljanje, dok imperijalni oblik vladavine sigurno dio svoje uspješnosti može zahvaliti i kozmopolitskoj ideji koja je odlično poslužila pri opravdanju i očuvanju niza imperijalnih projekata. Ovaj rad osvrnut će se na tu vezu ukazivanjem na sličnosti između učenja kasne stoe, koja je iskrivila početnu ideju kozmopolisa da bi pogodovala ideologiji Rimskog Carstva, te suvremenog, liberalnog shvaćanja kozmopolitizma, koji se također predstavlja univerzalnim, dok u biti odražava vrijednosti jednog malog dijela čovječanstva i pogoduje njegovoj poziciji moći. ; Historical interconnection of the idea of cosmopolitanism and empire is long and dates back to Antiquity. It is possible that the very idea of cosmopolitanism would not develop in the form we know today if there was not a political organization such as empire that provided the foundation for its design, while the imperial form of government certainly would not be so successful if cosmopolitanism was not at least partially located in the justification and the preservation in the series of imperial projects. This article will examine this connection by pointing out the similarities between the teachings of late Stoa, which distorted the initial idea of cosmopolis to favour the ideology of Roman Empire, and the contemporary, liberal conception of cosmopolitanism, which also presents itself as universal while in actuality reflects the values of a small part of humanity, and helps it in sustaining its position of power.

Kozmopolitizam i imperij dijele dugu zajedničku povijest koja seže još u antička vremena. Kozmopolitizam kao ideju sigurno ne bismo poznavali da nije bilo političke organizacije poput imperija, a imperijalni oblik vladavine sigurno ne bio toliko uspješan da se kozmopolitizam nije barem djelomično nalazio u opravdanju i očuvanju niza imperijalnih projekata. Interes za ideju kozmopolitizma obnovljen je u posljednjih dvadeset godina pojavom globalizacijske teorije, a također se čini da je i imperij, bilo da je odobravan ili osporavan, u skorije vrijeme postao popularan organizacijski koncept u akademskim diskusijama o našem trenutnom globalnom političkom stanju. Uspostava mira i njegovo održanje u oba ova koncepta igraju značajnu ulogu, no je li uopće moguće razlučiti kozmopolitsko od imperijalnog shvaćanja mira te kako ove sličnosti (i razlike) utječu na razvitak današnjeg globalnog vladanja? ; Cosmopolitanism and empire share a long history together, dating back to Antiquity. We would certainly not know of cosmopolitan idea if political organization such as Empire did not exist, and the imperial form of government certainly would not be so successful if cosmopolitanism was not at least partially involved in the justification and preservation of the series of imperial projects. Interest in the cosmopolitan idea was renewed in the last twenty years with the appearance of globalization theory, but it also appears that empire, whether it is accepted or disputed, also became a popular organizational concept in academic discussions about our current global political situation. In both of those concepts the establishment of peace and its maintenance plays an important role, but is it even possible to distinguish between cosmopolitan and imperial understanding of peace, and how these similarities (and differences) affect the development of today's global governance?

The idea of cosmopolitanism owes its origin to the Cynic Diogenes of Sinope, who first proclaimed, "I am cosmopolitan!" Although this identification was primarily negative in the sense that he did not declare it with the intention of becoming the first "citizen of the world" but rather to express disagreement with the laws of the ancient poleis, the Stoic school had consequently taken his initial idea and turned it into a comprehensive concept: the unity of humanity based on the shared ability to reason. At the beginning of the 21st century, this ancient idea is deemed a well-known concept. Indeed, cosmopolitanism is today primarily regarded as a specific idea, or behavioural pattern, represented by cosmopolitans or citizens of the world. Cosmopolitans, in turn, are those who consider themselves unfettered by the boundaries of existing political communities and their loyalty is not to any particular political community, rather they owe their loyalty to the more universal community of all human beings. By itself, this definition is accurate, but it is also too narrow, because the cosmopolitan idea involves so much more. From its former definition as mere detachment from the political systems of nation states and as the notion of "openness to the world", cosmopolitanism is now beginning to be seen as a legal and political framework, as an ethical ideal and vision of justice, as well as a type of identity choice made by individuals. This essay will try to demonstrate that what all of these different contemporary views on cosmopolitanism share is a vision of social belonging that cuts across the political boundaries imposed upon us, as well as a construction of new cosmopolitan identities that have just begun to erode our current understanding of the political community.

Još su 1970. Black Sabbath sa svojim ranim singlom Paranoid
ukazali na smjer kojim će krenuti ono što ćemo kasnije znati pod imenom
heavy metal. Tematski otklon od 'normalnosti' oblikovat će ne samo jedan
glazbeni žanr nego i cijelu jednu kontrakulturu. U pola stoljeća postojanja
metal će proći mnogo mutacija, no ostat će uvijek provokativan, uvijek
ekstreman i uvijek na granici, a često i preko granice dobroga ukusa. On
će biti onaj ružni zrcalni odraz koji će ukazati na sve manjkavosti našega
modernog društva – ratove, bolesti, licemjerje, pohlepu, uništenje prirode…
Iako eskapistički element heavy metala nikako ne treba ignorirati, ovaj rad
će se u potrazi za njegovom identitetnom osnovom usmjeriti na njegov
društveni, odnosno politički element da bi procijenio koliko je samo
njegovo postojanje izmijenilo živote koje danas poznajemo.

In the aftermath of the last financial crisis a strong message prevails that 'something' has to be changed in the manner global finance is governed. What exactly this 'something' entails and what could constitute the 'common ground' of anticipated change is more difficult to determine. Many envisage future improvements of global financial governance by evoking deliberative democracy, political equality and cosmopolitanism. As financial regulation is the main instrument through which global finance is shaped and governed nowadays, these principles should then be transmitted to regulatory arrangements. This paper focuses on a new conceptual approach to regulatory and governance issues in global finance, by employing the philosophical idea of cosmopolitanism. It argues that although as a concept, cosmopolitanism cannot mitigate all the flaws attributed to contemporary finance, its development and extension to international financial regulation that is promulgated by institutions of the global financial system, would represent a worthwhile endeavour in making global finance more accountable and just in the eyes of many.

International audience ; In the aftermath of the last financial crisis a strong message prevails that 'something' has to be changed in the manner global finance is governed. What exactly this 'something' entails and what could constitute the 'common ground' of anticipated change is more difficult to determine. Many envisage future improvements of global financial governance by evoking deliberative democracy, political equality and cosmopolitanism. As financial regulation is the main instrument through which global finance is shaped and governed nowadays, these principles should then be transmitted to regulatory arrangements. This paper focuses on a new conceptual approach to regulatory and governance issues in global finance, by employing the philosophical idea of cosmopolitanism. It argues that although as a concept, cosmopolitanism cannot mitigate all the flaws attributed to contemporary finance, its development and extension to international financial regulation that is promulgated by institutions of the global financial system, would represent a worthwhile endeavour in making global finance more accountable and just in the eyes of many.

The Euro area sovereign debt crisis provoked transformative effects within the governance of the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU), introducing new modes of policy-making as well as new stakeholders within the governance structure, among which the Eurogroup. Although an "informal body" that gathers high-level, national representatives in deliberations related to wider economic matters within the Euro area, the Eurogroup quickly established itself as a key influencer of the policy agenda of the Economic and Financial Affairs Council (Ecofin). The Eurogroup's prominent role within EMU policy-making has attracted scholarly attention, with some noting that the body's role in decisionmaking is "under-theorised" (Craig 2017, p. 234), which in turn raises important concerns in regards of the Eurogroup's accountability and legitimacy. Against this background the paper examines the Eurogroup's legitimacy and (political) accountability, by outlining (or mapping) theoretical and legal basis thereof, especially in the perspective of EMU's growing democratic deficit.

Over the years EU member states favored an intergovernmental approach to policy-making within the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU). This approach emphasized the role played by national authorities, as member states' representatives, within a "soft governance" framework. In this framework, national representatives voluntarily participated in various coordinative networks and committees, which relied on interstate negotiations to create policies. However, the Euro area crisis highlighted the shortcomings of the intergovernmental approach to policy-making, such as divergent implementation of policies and regulatory arbitrage, which undermined the EMU's stability. After the crisis, we are witnessing a centralization of policy creation processes and decision-making within the EMU, with apparently limited room for "old intergovernmentalism". New actors such as the European Supervisory Authorities, perfectly embody this development since they require from member states to commonly agree "under the shadow" of non-majoritarian institutions, at times even against their own policy preferences. This raises important questions on the role of "old" conceptual frameworks in explaining current EU integration. Therefore, this paper explores the concept of intergovernmentalism (and also, "liberal intergovernmentalism") as one the key driving forces within EMU's governance, offering further insight into raised questions as well as arguing in favor of its political and integrationist potential in the years to come.