Doing things by halves

On intermediary global institutional proposals

Bibliographic Data

ID12866676
AuthorsLuke Ulaş (0000-0002-8294-4704, Goethe University Frankfurt, corresponding author)
Year2016
Volume9
Issue1
Pages30223-30223
Publication date2016-01-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueEthics & Global Politics (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1654-6369 • E-ISSN: 1654-4951
PublisherTaylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.3402/egp.v9.30223
OpenAlexW2413593063
LanguageEN
Citations received3
References cited6

Various cosmopolitan theorists offer global institutional prescriptions intended to be understood as residing conceptually between a system of separate domestic states and a federal world state. In this article I assess such ‘intermediary’ models, and claim that they are an unprofitable mix of idealism and misplaced pragmatism: they are ostensibly illustrations of future-oriented institutional ideals, and yet they are infused with concessions to present-day reality. In some cases, the concession is merely rhetorical: we are offered world state visions in intermediary clothing. In other cases, the concession is substantive, with the ironic result that intermediary models are in fact less feasible than the idea of a world state which intermediary theorists quickly reject. The overall aim of the argument is not to fully defend the idea of a world state, but rather only to demonstrate that there are reasons, from a cosmopolitan perspective, to consider a world state superior to intermediary models

Argument (complex analysis · Cosmopolitanism · Economics · Epistemology · Idealism · Intermediary · Law and economics · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Pragmatism · Rhetorical question · Sociology · State (computer science · Vision · Global Peace and Security Dynamics · International Relations and Foreign Policy · Law · Philosophy · Political Philosophy and Ethics

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access