Suchergebnisse

"Brett Bowden examines how the idea of civilization has informed our thinking about more than ten centuries of global encounters among the different peoples of our world." "From the Crusades to the colonial era to the global war on terror, this volume exposes "civilization" as a stage-managed account of history that legitimizes imperialism, uniformity, and conformity to Western standards, culminating in a liberal-democratic global order. Along the way, Bowden explores the variety of confrontations and conquests - as well as those peoples and places excluded or swept aside - undertaken in the name of civilization. Concluding that the "West and the rest" have more commonalities than differences, this provocative and engaging book ultimately points the way toward an authentic intercivilizational dialogue that emphasizes cooperation over clashes."

AbstractThis essay considers the similarities and differences between world history, global history, and universal history. It demonstrates how a philosophical, and specifically a teleological, understanding of history is central to the idea of universal history. To a certain extent, this philosophical version of universal history transcends both world history and global history in that some versions of each of those are in fact universal histories of this very kind.

Just as domestic civil society is widely regarded as serving the greater common good of a national democratic political community, global civil society is also promoted as a vehicle through which a host of humanity's ills may be remedied. This article argues that the pinning of such high hopes on global civil society is mistaken, for its proponents have failed to recognise that global civil society is insufficiently analogous to domestic civil society for it to be a similarly positive force. At the national level, civil society functions in a balanced interdependence with the state. At the global level there is no equivalent of the state to provide the necessary scrutiny and regulation that at the national level prevents constituents of domestic civil society from committing injustices.

Sparked by the recent reinvigoration of the long-running debate over the competing ideological merits of nationalism and cosmopolitanism by leading Western philosophers, this article presents an argument as to how these two adversarial projects might be r

As a tool for understanding the world in which we live the study of the history of political thought is stunted because of a preoccupation with the Western canon as the history of political thought to the exclusion of other histories and traditions. This

Just as domestic civil society is widely regarded as serving the greater common good of a national democratic political community, global civil society is also promoted as a vehicle through which a host of humanity's ills may be remedied. This article argues that the pinning of such high hopes on global civil society is mistaken, for its proponents have failed to recognise that global civil society is insufficiently analogous to domestic civil society for it to be a similarly positive force. At the national level, civil society functions in a balanced interdependence with the state. At the global level there is no equivalent of the state to provide the necessary scrutiny and regulation that at the national level prevents constituents of domestic civil society from committing injustices.

Sparked by the recent reinvigoration of the long-running debate over the competing ideological merits of nationalism and cosmopolitanism by leading Western philosophers, this article presents an argument as to how these two adversarial projects might be r