Can the gap between Liberal Nationalist and Cosmopolitan views be bridged to tackle international inequality/poverty in the pursuit of international justice and if so, how can, and why should, this be done? (PDF)

Doktorarbeit / Dissertation aus dem Jahr 2012 im Fachbereich Politik - Allgemeines und Theorien zur Internationalen Politik, Note: 2:1, University of Nottingham, Sprache: Deutsch, Abstract: In the face of international poverty, it has long been contested as to what each country's responsibilities are in the pursuit of international justice. On one side are the nationalists, and on the other, cosmopolitans. Cosmopolitans argue that the kind of bonds which engender national unity should be extended on to the international front as it is these bonds which ensure that true international justice is obtained. However nationalists maintain that in the practical world there are no significant incentives for international justice because nearly all social bonds are limited to national borders, with the only exception being compassionate help given in the face of a catastrophe.

Furthermore nationalists advocate that all countries have an ethical responsibility to value each country's different traditional beliefs which are usually expressed in the specific rules and regulations they follow. Nationalists maintain that the responsibility to uphold the respect for each country's beliefs is so important that every country should be allowed to confront the results of their own decisions, even if those decisions cause severe destitution in their respective countries. Cosmopolitans acquiesce with nationalists as far as each country's duty to value another's national sovereignty and allowing them to tackle the effects of their own decision-making go, but insist that the framework within which national sovereignty is implemented, must be impartial and equitable. Hence prior to the exercising of respect for each country's beliefs, the international economic system that hinders the implementation of national sovereignty must be relieved of its meddling tendencies which constrain a country's range of options.

A further requirement is that those particular beliefs which are detrimental to the individual and can cause impoverishment must be amended. Cosmopolitans in effect, maintain that the way nationalism is understood should be modified and the individual should be the central point of analysis and ethical interest. Moreover they consider that although there is a high deficiency in international unity, this issue can be sorted out by searching for, as well as executing, international justice in the practical world. Additionally this does not nullify the ethical significance of cosmopolitan values of justice.