Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 18

The Cosmopolitan State: Redefining Power in the Global Age Author(s): Ulrich Beck Reviewed work(s): Source: International

Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society, Vol. 18, No. 3/4, The New Sociological Imagination (Spring - Summer, 2005), pp. 143-159 Published by: Springer Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20059680 . Accessed: 06/02/2013 21:54
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Springer is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded on Wed, 6 Feb 2013 21:54:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Int J Polit Cult Soc DOI 10.1007/s

(2005) 18:143-159 10767-006-9001-1

The Cosmopolitan in the Global Age


Ulrich Beck

State: Redefining

Power

Published ? Springer

online:

Science

24 October 2006 + Business Media,

LLC

2006

The discourse
mystery, However,

of globalization
and points to a revolution from

resembles an Indian god:


the attitude direction: social as with which globalization, sciences, argue forcing ?

it has many

faces,

is full of
or hope. context, a

all-powerful thesis my

it confirms in another in the ?

it is approached: fear in a socio-theoretical a change predominant

is tantamount change of

in perspective, "methodological

paradigms

the

I would

nationalism" to a "methodological cosmopolitanism" (Beck, 2006; Beck & Sznaider, 2006). I will first examine this thesis in general and then, as a second step, develop it inmore
detail using the example of a key topic, the concepts of power and state.

What
Every begin reflexive

does "Globalization"
attempt with the rather to use

Mean

in the Context
discourse

of the Social Sciences?


in the I define the local social sciences has as to a

the globalization

What does question: than a linear process,

productively mean? "globalization" taking to the global their and

(or

'globalization' the universal

and

the particular) not as opposites but as combined and mutually


processes are historically variable than mere state (tied contexts) and changing further goes application states nation and nation "interconnectedness", (Held, McGrew,

implicit principles. These


multidimensional. the & relations Perraton, Their between 1999).

societies

Goldblatt,

Rather, they alter the quality of the social and the political within nation state societies. Here
I refer from to the "internal within. what does "internal globalization" or "cosmopolitanization from within" mean? One globalization" or even "cosmopolitanization" of nation state societies

But

can answer this question by referring to the theory of reflexive modernization (see Beck, Giddens, & Lash, 1994; Beck, Bon?, & Lau, 2001; Beck & Lau, 2005). One central
operational thesis, basic indicator of reflexive modernization is the pluralisation of borders.

This is supposed to be true for so fundamental dualisms like the borders between nature and
Lecture U. Beck London e-mail: at the New (El) School School University New York, April 2001.

of Economics,

University

of Munich,

London,

UK

u.beck@lmu.de ? Springer

This content downloaded on Wed, 6 Feb 2013 21:54:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

144

Int J Polit Cult

Soc

(2005)

18:143-159

and unawareness, knowledge society, on the Other. If one focuses and means national

subject globalization borders far is

and

peace object, from within the implosion a multitude

and war, the of

life and

death, of

We

pluralisation the dualism of non-identical

borders the

of nation-state the pluralisation How and international: the

or

between

there

borders

themes and dimensions emerging, within which opportunities of action for whom); for example:
economic cultural cross (e.g., (e.g., border asymmetry transnational networks, between mobility of flows structures;

and with

what

effects

(strategy

capital and

and life

labour styles; and

migration); private and public

communication making

decision

number

types

of

transnational

marriages, births);
political, state (e.g., (e.g. post national citizenship); legal lex mercatoria);

global risks (e.g., climate crisis, BSE crisis, bio politics, genetically modified
military, force); police technological (e.g., decision (e.g., community making the Internet formation, structures and social of NATO or for of a European location its consequences movements).

food);
police

independent

communication,

In terms of the "methodological


social sciences, these borders coincide

nationalism", which
(deviations are

has so far been dominant


? exceptions)

in the

considered

the axiom

of the congruity of borders. In the terms of a "methodological cosmopolitanism" these borders diverge. "Internal globalization" thus stands for dissonance in the drawing of
borderlines ? the axiom of the incongruity of borders. In other words: borders are no

longer predetermined, they can be chosen (and interpreted), but simultaneously also have to
be an increase in plausible of drawing is both: ways to question borders. existing are no borders and economic When congruent, cultural, longer legal political, of exclusion. the various between contradictions Globalization, up open principles a legitimation crisis of in other words as pluralisation of borders, understood produces, as two conditions: insofar This under of exclusion. the national emerges Firstly, morality are recognized transnational contexts become the national social and political (and problem as national and ethnic in turn. Secondly, insofar as such), demanding solutions transnational one and the same lived context. within and are de-essentialised ties are pluralised, overlap redrawn and new borders and legitimated a growing anew. There tendency

At this point questions as to the distribution of memberships open up: On which principles are the internal hierarchies (between minorities, themajority and migrants) of communities or states based? In addition, questions as to the distribution of civil rights: Who, and/or which principles decide who enjoys civil rights (legitimate presence, employment, social security, political participation) and what exactly do these rights entail? Further, questions as to the distribution of global responsibilities: Why do we have to recognize a special moral responsibility towards other people just because by accident they do have the same nationality. Why should they be free of any moral sensibility towards other people for the sole reason that they happened to be born on the other side of the national fence? What loses any legitimacy is the fundamentally dubious assumption that such responsibilities are absolute within a border while
This exclusion crisis sets off

their absence is equally absolute outside this border.


an avalanche of "cosmopolitan" questions: Can the reasons

which a society gives for the exclusion of strangers be questioned by members of this society and strangers alike? Who questions, who decides, who justifies and who defines
who "Who" is? For example, may "foreigners" participate in the process of discussion,

definition
?

and decision-making

when

it comes to the issue of civil rights? Or does this

Springer

This content downloaded on Wed, 6 Feb 2013 21:54:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Int J Polit Cult Soc

(2005)

18:143-159

145

decision

ultimately

lie solely with


Of

the members?
The right "racial

May
of

members

claim

a right to
The

to exclude in order homogeneity homogeneity"? right of "religious The constellation cosmopolitan which which are have asserted previously both internally been

others?

"ethnic

self-determination"? cleansing"?

evidently and externally,

Of "ethnic homogeneity"? creates demands greater it opens the onus up discussion of proof and

for legitimation, to include groups excludes a series

excluded,

redistributes

of principles as illegitimate or questions about the NATO intervention in Kosovo


national to the fore in exemplary fashion:

their legitimacy. The international controversy in 1999 brought this crisis of exclusion of the
it aWestern invasion of a sovereign state? Or

Was

did NATO establish a new priority of individual human rights over international law with
unpredictable consequences?

Drawing on Yasemin Soysal's (1994) study "Limits of Citizenship" and Aihwa Ong's (1999) work on "Flexible Citizenship", this crisis of exclusion of the national can also be
elucidated by way of the transition from national to post-national to global and political membership.

Entitlements
the nation conferred NGOs, others, solely national and no less longer "Border political alisation Established three and areas can be ? on

(with respect to residency and pension rights) are no longer exclusively


state national ? individuals and citizens' mediated rights, by but also human agencies rights, which certain authorities

tied to
are

(UN-resolution, Among explained Rather, have state less

in turn, has numerous This, European etc.). legislation repercussions: can no longer be the comparatively in Germany low rate of naturalisation restrictive of German by the still comparatively regulations citizenships. citizenship interest exclude may be losing its importance particularly concerns altogether. because ? in life that there national norm, negotiable of Thus all-inclusive job, "transmigrants" welfare

in "assimilation", them from central

systems

retirement

pension. pluralism institution of action. are must true not of

discrepancies" on a

in this case means global, European, of the

is a dissonant and communal opens

but normal level. up the The field words: ? This

membership of these borders area subject

contradictions become of

however,

multifaceted area and

borderlines. of

In other commitment

There which

influence,

to decision,

area responsibility, must these decisions be

legitimated.

holds

only for questions of civil rights and political membership, but also for questions of bio politics (genetic engineering, human genetics) and of criminality as well as for questions of
employment at various One resulting law, environmental levels and leads modified this occurs BSE, food, etc. All policies, genetically to a pluralisation of strategic actors and strategic frontiers. is this: In the course of such a pluralisation of borders and the and conflicts, which assume new patterns and forms of

decisive exclusion

repercussion crises

development,
from becomes

the nation state axioms of the social sciences


"methodological nationalism"

implode. A shift of paradigm


cosmopolitanism"

the prevalent necessary.

to a "methodological

The Question

of a "Cosmopolitan of the social


implies

Social Science"1 sciences


that there

In the understanding
"societies". This,

"society" generally
are as many societies

stands for its plural,


as nation states. The

however,

revival of the social sciences proposed here does not imply the "politicisation" of "cosmopolitan" sociology, political theory, history, etc. but rather of increasing the social sciences' awareness of transnational and methodological-organisational terms (Beck, 2006; for debate see British reality in empirical-analytical Journal of Sociology 2006, issue 1).

1 Tue

Springer

This content downloaded on Wed, 6 Feb 2013 21:54:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

146
state which is the creator, emerge and and of society. guarantor the state's within sphere

Int J Polit Cult Soc

(2005)

18:143-159

controller, are sustained

Societies of

are

influence.

as containers, thought This container-theory one

of nation state societies which defines and limits societies territorially, is deeply ingrained
in the self-perception imagination. of sociology, The nation to speak that the core in its categories gaze a has and become concepts, sociology's could limit say, in the sociological In this and the context, state of of perception. explicit and that

it is possible assumptions provides

implicit national

the nation order for

nationalism", "methodological state is the container of social the of social,

meaning processes, and

processes. fundamentally We thus territory national constitutive territory versa: what companies, the

It is exactly

this nation

questionable to query, have the national two logically

political analysis a priori of the social which is becoming sciences, of the pluralisation in the course of borders. for example, the assumed between national correspondence state as the related implication conditions. of Globalization to be or even read that In fact, the national however, What and the non

economic

and are

as well mutually collapses states to be, and is

exclusive as a result

distinction of sovereign

processes. as a national as

this previously occurs within And ? vice big e.g.,

is not

necessarily as, can be

process. "national"

appears flows

of capital

labelled ? culture

understood outside

localised

national

territories,

in another country or in the digital space. This localisation of the global (or non-national) within national territories and of the national outside national territories undermines the key differentiation of the national and the non-national as being logically and empirically
exclusive mutually frameworks of the conditions, social which lies (Sassen, at the heart 2006). of so many methods or conceptional sciences

A widespread
sciences a relapse to is that an of the

and certainly justified worry within


inclusion social of globalization into sciences phenomena metaphysics.

the empirically
and questions An empirical an creates

oriented

social
of of

social

the danger science

globalization
lead

is not in sight and may


of theoretical

even be impossible. The fear that globalization will


theory without empirical basis has been

a revival

sociological

qualified by numerous studies (e.g., Held et al, 1999; Beisheim, Dreher, Walter, Zang, & Z?rn, 1999; Sassen, 2006), but cannot be dismissed so easily in view of the over-theoretical
nature of the debate.

The conceptual
globalization

and methodological
state societies

study of cosmopolitan
should thus have the goal

sociology
of creating

of the internal
a "cosmopolitan

of nation

index ". This should include the systematic treatment of questions such as the following (Beck-Gernsheim, 2004; Beisheim et al., 1999; Beck, 2000; Beck, 2006; Held et al, 1999):
How nationality? many people How many in Germany, children Great grow up Britain, France, etc. marry context? foreigners? Of which

in a bi-national

? the place they How many languages are spoken? What do people most identify with or with the fate of the world as a whole live (local identity), their nation (national identity) (cosmopolitan identity)? Are these identifications mutually ex- or inclusive? In other words, how far and inwhich areas do local and cosmopolitan identities, for example, or national
and cosmopolitan ones, interconnect or clash ? and what are the repercussions? What

percentage of the work force, with which qualifications


perceived as such? How to be real or potential winners or losers

and in which professions,


or perceive

can be

of globalization, or products,

themselves

great

is the

exchange

of

cultural

programs

how

large

is the

share

of

[imported?] products on TV, on the radio, in the book-market, etc.? What do telephone ? the relation of domestic to international calls? habits look like within one country ? Springer

This content downloaded on Wed, 6 Feb 2013 21:54:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Int J Polit Cult Soc

(2005)

18:143-159

147

Similar to be as

data taken, of

ought however,

to be not of

taken

from

the areas the

of

tourism

or travel of

in general. such indicators

Great

care

has

to oversimplify consciousness questions must

interpretation

or variables

proof

society". really

a change two Rather, give rise

or behaviour be taken

further

pointing into account: or potentials?

towards How Or

a "cosmopolitan far do does these trends

to new

cosmopolitan

sensibilities

the

perceived

internal globalization become a bogeyman in peoples' minds? Or even: do both occur simultaneously, and if so, inwhich proportions? In other words, how do specific population
groups from or countries react in their self-perception, and, above all, of to universities, force police and the cosmopolitan borders in public in primary their lived debates, schools, organisations, to the pluralisation of Is a subterranean, relations? in their

transformation

invisible change in national experience taking place? Is the national frame of reference and one? Are the two linked in experience really being replaced by a cosmopolitan
contradiction or do they constitute an explosive opposition? Perhaps any relevant

statement will inevitably relate only to specific topics (migration, the global ecological crisis)? How then, and with what time-lags is this creeping internal cosmopolitanization
reflected in people's minds, attitudes and actions? And how can this complex trans

nationalisation
has appropriate to be done

of lived, work
and organized of

and production
practicable

relations be drawn together in terms of


"cosmopolitan index"! research research. This, of course, avoiding networks,

indicators

of an empirically

the embarrassing

paradox

transnationally a "German etc.

in transnational globalization"

It systems

is, however, centred validity The break: the rules and on

extremely the nation logical

difficult state,

to break even when

up

forms they are

of

observation confronted with

and

conceptual

empirical logical address and

and

inconsistency. tools

What

is required, of analysis of

predominant of this new power to uncover and

and methods the "drama" them

game, decode

therefore, are not adequate simply transnational border pluralisations level. ?

of problems is an epistemo to

conflicts,

at an empirical-theoretical on the are other. Social

Ultimately,

the discourse of globalization


world reality on the one hand and and dynamics, to put

casts doubt on the relation between our knowledge


social structures ? carefully structures or

of the
social

An appropriate transnationalised. being to this ontological of perception, is transformation, epistemological change corresponding ? that is, from a methodological to a methodological nationalism required cosmopolitan a new differentiation in turn necessitates ism. This in social and political between analysis ? are possibly of appearance the levels national in phenomena circularly misinterpreted, ? state framework the nation of analysis and the level of essence, to be i.e., they have analyzed cosmopolitan Use leading with are are of us and theoretically framework. the nation to believe state that we processes can paradigm are observing or processes state thus be or become very when illusory and mistaken, are dealing explained as transnational phenomena and dynamics in a

itmore

national entailing

transnational refracted thus

phenomena a new ambiguity: and forms strategies

in fact we transnational

dynamics Results that of

identified

in persisting nation as "national"

institutions

standard international comparative studies2?


of border pluralisations, flows, as consequences information technologically determined

phenomena

and

of consciousness. ? even in

the

context

should in fact be identified, under conditions


of mobile, changes transnational in the capital, human culture image, and risks,

efforts Corresponding are already available.

in the area of economics,

that is, the creation

and practice

of a "transnational

index",

&

Springer

This content downloaded on Wed, 6 Feb 2013 21:54:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

148

Int J Polit Cult Soc

(2005)

18:143-159

transnational assume

inflected historical and political etc., which, inequalities, by specific a variety zones of "national" in different of an open global appearances

conditions, economy.

This paradigm shift is founded on and signalled by a dualism characterised by the opposing
terms international and transnational. The dominant assumption and keeps politics, is that this differentiation

lends the world a new design. The national order was divisible
and of outside, experience at the centre encompassed of which the the nation central themes state rules of work,

into a clearly defined inside


order. cultural The internal identity realm and the

resulting crises and class conflicts, perceived and processed against the backdrop of the collective unit of action provided by the nation. The international, located in the external
sphere of experience, corresponded and to the confirmed self-perception In this sense, is reflected the distinction image of "multiculturalism", in the distinction from and was always more in which exclusion than the national of strangers. it

national/international

a differentiation;

was rather a constantly self-fulfilling prophecy: After all, it associates


potentially we know violent, from identities race and and creates space and together renews form history of sovereign images a deadly discourse.

land with exclusive,


territories. And as

The opposing thesis of transnationality blows open this entire framework of meanings from the inside. Against the backdrop of the transnational, it suddenly emerges that national
and international cannot from national be one and clearly another. the differentiated, National international that realms no nor are can they serve to so separate that the of entities homogenous national is no longer transnationalisation open space from and the time, inside new de-nationalised, international. state

the container and

of power

the outside of

coordinates

is simultaneously broken a new and a new view is established, of perspective as already mentioned: the and the political, the social

longer is the nation

In the course

world
This

is designed anew, justifying a new epochal term, that of the second age of modernity.
paradigmatic a logical the zero opposition or temporal of exclusivity, i.e., what internationality rather and an uneasy This transnationality co-existence should certainly is gained does of not however a new seen as a transition, not in the be

justify form of negative and vice The

of simultaneity ? sum game

the non-simultaneous. is lost

in the national

transnational

versa. same goes for conflicts of gender, The class, ethnicity, homosexuality, of social which though is also

they have emerged from the national realm have long left it behind and in reality overlap
and interconnect in the transnational.

evident ?
values,

cosmopolitanization

movements

just as is the fact that these have become


entitlements, taken sciences

the bearers of global understanding,


the argument of thus far ? means ? reality concepts public

conflicts,

"Globalization" that the social

and duties. rights ? to summarise to its conclusion be founded anew and class, as a

must

science

transnational The state, key

conceptually, of "modern

? must be removed from their fixed settings in methodological sphere, politics, etc. nationalism. They must be redefined or rethought in the framework of methodological cosmopolitanism. This has to be done elsewhere (Beck & Grande, 2007). Paradigm Shift in the Social Sciences from the First to the Second Age of Modernity

methodologically, theoretically, ? household, family, society"

also

organisationally. power,

democracy,

economy,

Methodological Borders

Nationalism

Methodological Incongruency mingle is

Cosmopolitanism of borders: inside and outside

of borders: the national Congruency of inside and outside differentiation dominates all areas; political membership and exclusive.

predetermined 4? Springer

to area: borders have according to be redrawn and justified; continually elective plural political memberships.

This content downloaded on Wed, 6 Feb 2013 21:54:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Int J Polit Cult Soc

(2005)

18:143-159

149
Differentiation economy: of nation state and global

Economy

Differentiation

and of domestic economy within the order of industry (family/market) the nation state; transition from agricultural societies with local markets and production for hundreds of years, unchanged social cohesion was founded on

de- or ex-territorialised

methods where

of the economy without the reorganisation framework of a global state; rise structuring of a world-, market-, and ego-society, where capital and labour are mobile without limits, are largely urbanised, populations religions and ethnicities pluralised and social inequalities radicalised. Under these conditions "nationalism" becomes a "cure" that is worse than the illness.

religious rites to a national age of modernity, which is dominated by market economy, and national culture are mutually democracy determining and dominant.

State/politics

Apparently

a priori fusion of space and of space and identity: de Uncoupling = = territorial state nation state; spatialisation of state, politics and society ? identity: state state of equated with autonomy: state"; differentiation sovereignty "cosmopolitan national self-determination and autonomy: national tasks independence, sovereignty and the solution of central national tasks have to be solved transnationally; the loss of (welfare, law, security) coincide. autonomy can lead to a gain in sovereignty.

Methodological Class/social inequalities State-centred

Nationalism

Methodological

Cosmopolitanism from state: social

social inequalities sociology: are solely and exclusively addressed within the national framework ? "consonant notion of unacknowledged ethnic-national of differentiation

Sociology

detached

inequalities in world society: (c) intranational;

are addressed multidimensionally (a) global, (b) transnational,

hierarchies"; ethnicity; mobility

and Migration. culture: dominant

"discrepant/dissonant notion of hierarchies"; acknowledged = world societal ethnicity; "migration" (upward) mobility. Non-hierarchical pluralism: universal coexistence of cultural differences; quantitative majorities and qualitative metamorphosis into minorities and vice versa; of

Ethnicity/ culture

Hegemony

majority

homogeneity premise; "minority problems"; hidden essentialism; non-differentiating race and space create a universalism; fatal discourse; political potentially assimilation and integration. goal:

de recognition of ethnic differences; new mixed forms (hybrids) and essentialised; lived relations ("diaspora"); plural ethnic of "here" and identities, the co-presence "there". Ethics Other"; of inclusive dominance exclusion: the "present versus the

Ethics

Ethics

of exclusion:

dominance universal. Globalization ?

the "absent Other"; of the particular versus the external ? "additive"

of the universal

"Interconnectedness":

particular ("cosmopolitan nation"). Internal globalization: "cosmopolitan The distinction implodes national/international frame of in the reference world

index";

the national and the globalization; international constitute two seemingly logically mutually exclusive conditions; world society secondary; primary backdrop (socially and in the social sciences) national society(ies).

transnationality; backdrop;

society

sociological

categories

is the primary become

"zombie-categories".

The Cosmopolitan

State: Redefining

Power

in the Global Age

In the second half of this chapter Iwant to pick up only one topic out of themany ? and ask: How do the concepts of "power" and "state" have to be redefined in the global age? (Beck, 2005) In order to answer this huge question (in five minutes) or to sketch out an
4y Springer

This content downloaded on Wed, 6 Feb 2013 21:54:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

150
one theses: to to

Int J Polit Cult

Soc

(2005)

18:143-159

exemplary economy.

illustration I have eight

has

refer

the

relationship

of

nation-state

and

global

First power, relation.

thesis that The

The is:

relationship the power

between to change

world the

economy rules of

and the

the

state

now and

resembles international it has broken

a meta power out of

national

economy

in particular

has

gained

this meta-power

because

the cage of the territorially and nationally organised and dominated power conflict and has
acquired for power chess and new while changing power moves in the digital changing of the game space. So by "meta-power rules The game" of power. ? pawn I mean It's the like playing playing ? simultaneously the rules the nation-state along the way.

economy

the knight (given new possibilities of mobility suddenly becomes by information can thus checkmate the king ? the state. But suddenly the state may technology) and
also to "jump" and begin From what do capital summed up in the headline the German chancellor: can thus checkmate draw east their strategies of an "We the knight-economy new meta-power? newspaper and on Await in new The basic ways, etc. was of the principle of the visit It is

European

the occasion the

Forgive

the Crusaders

Investors".

precise opposite of the classic theory of power and authority which maximizes
transnational investors, overrun by or corporations: the threat of The their threat is no longer overrun of an invasion one but of withdrawal. being ? There is only thing worse

the power of
of being than

the non-invasion

big multinationals:

not

by multinationals. ? to make

This kind of authority is no longer tied to the execution of orders, but rather to the
possibility of going somewhere else to other countries better investments. It

thus introduces the threat of not doing something, that is, of not investing in this country. The new global economic power of big business is thus, in this sense, not founded on
violence makes "globally as the ultimate more rationale mobile, to force that is, not their will tied upon others; specific it so much to any location it is precisely this which and consequently

disposable".

While
foreign

the power of states (according to the national rationale) grows by conquering


territories, to do the power of the global the opposite, by being and countries foreign become by state or grows economy's players precisely by doing to leave the relevant national in a position territory, to the extent This in turn succeeds that territories. factors. military The power and of the state is thus but not

threatening to not conquer transnational undermined

companies or broken

extraterritorial power, i.e.,

threat

conquest,

rather

of transnational trade and deterritorially, exterritorially, by way of a new weightlessness activity in the digital space. This deterritorial conception of power reverses the logic of the
traditional Not understanding imperialism of power, violence, not authority. invasion but the retreat of investors constitutes but non-imperialism,

the nucleus of power of global economic power. The deterritorialised power of business need neither be politically obtained nor legitimated. Its implementation avoids the
institutions Deliberate inaction ? of no developed ? conquest democracy this such as parliament, nor even the courts threat of achieving and government. or meta non-violent, upon consent invisible, intentional capable of withdrawal it. This

is neither

conditional

power
change The

is neither illegal nor legitimate;


the state rules between of power analogy the military

it is "translegal", but it possesses


and of international power and systems. the economic

the power
rationale

to
of

in the national rationale

? power is evident: Investment capital is the equivalent of fire power difference, the threat of not firing enlarges the power. Product development
the state is the equivalent of weapon innovation. Taxes can be defence

with the big subsidized by


protecting

strategies

Springer

This content downloaded on Wed, 6 Feb 2013 21:54:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Int J Polit Cult Soc

(2005)

18:143-159

151

local and

and

national

markets research

against and

global

invaders, force-fed power

investors. with of global

Offence government capital. of

is the best support And, of

defence and the

that means: money,

taxpayers'

increases

development, the offensive

course,

ideological warship has been replaced by the discourse on globalization.


On reversing the one hand you can, of as I did, explain the concept Max the classical concept state power as, for example, global Weber meta-power defines it. On by the

other hand the first and most


the globalization can conquest classical The is not discourse. be understood of power

important victory of globalization may be the globalization of


And this discursive in Foucault that focus capital of globalization, power 's theory of power, which on power over others and which exists no one of differs assume deliberate greatly clear non from agency.

definitions power a choice.

of not-investing It is a nobody's can

rule. No

is something, which one is in charge,

everywhere. started it, no

Globalization one can stop

it. It is a kind of organized


responsible, you complaint

irresponsibility. You keep


to. But there is nobody on

looking for someone who


the other side of the phone,

is
no

email address. So the more the globalization discourse dominates through discursive identity construction all areas of life, including the self-definition of one's own life in terms
of said 'self-entrepreneurship', before, often that managers unseen Two the more are ruling capital powerful the world. of strategies of get. This does not mean, as I

consequences

this meta-power

global

economy

are

really

remarkable. So far throughout history the rules of the game in world politics have been bloody and imperialistic. The new global meta-power is in its essence pacifistic (maybe not
in its consequences). The power of global capitalism derives from potential non-conquest.

Of course, global capital has to be localized somewhere and so it is imperialistic at the same time. But it is a kind of imperialism, which the invaded, even if they don't like it at all, vitally depend upon.
Second, even a perhaps and only "cosmopolitan ? at home time capitalism" and in a special is in ? sense, "cosmopolitan Global corporations" corporations are and maybe using and the making. is becoming policy

developing
nationalities and at the

the productivity

of diversity.
abroad employment

The mixing
their of is

of races,
central transnational the norm,

ethnic groups
for

and

resource

creativity

same

a dominant

antidote tansnational which national

against sets

stagnation and

is hybridization.

governance companies So

agencies.

the growing meta-power corporations. ? free to diversify their workforces often national against are transnational en minature. societies global corporations new other. But, are are very

M?lange It is exactly

The corporations. at least of inside of capital, laws and

As I said, the concept of meta-power


it. So the old and and are territorial penetrating and the each contradicting processes politics (Kaldor), outcomes twentieth

implies changing the rules of the game by playing


deterritorialized What in fact, They we are power talking game about, of the overlapping, ambivalent

open-end

scenarios.

the old do goals, not

categories capture

state

becoming new actors, of

zombie-categories. strategies, both to expect resources, inside

centred and power ? new the new wars and ambivalent of the too

conflicts, nations. we have

paradoxes After

the meta-power, we have century

and

between But

the nightmare realistically

the worse.

to recognize

that through all the confusion and threats the rising power of capital changing the rules of state power, but doing this in a pacifistic way, without democratic legitimation and with
"translegal" means at the same time.

Second dynamics

thesis What of conflict,

does

'translegal'

mean?

The

meta-power

game

derives

its subjects, particularly

its

its forms

of development

and unpredictable

consequences

Springer

This content downloaded on Wed, 6 Feb 2013 21:54:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

152

Int J Polit Cult Soc

(2005)

18:143-159

because strategically

in

this

way

the

negotiated,

boundary redrawn and

between redefined.

and is economics politics one To pick up example: ones

broken The

up, state

monopoly
advanced

of law making
capitalist societies

is being privatized. Legal changes are the order of the day in


as much as in former socialist and in the countries of

Africa, Asia and Latin America, which are reshaping their legal norms and institutions under the regime of the International Monetary Fund and theWorld Bank. So the state no
longer law enjoys a monopoly over bodies, the production lex mercatoria, of law. A range of new actors ? firms, arbitration international institutions and NGOs corporate ? are

contributing to the diversity of forms of regulation, to the variety of settings of rule creation
and to proliferation of methods of interpretation and application of norms and standards.

Law is both: privatized and transnationalized. It is instrumental in structuring processes of transnationalisation just as it is being shaped through them. Thus property rights, patent
law, between environmental national and law and human transnational and rights contexts are the key areas in which the boundaries are blurred, and are remixed. disappear thus become ". They private organisations "as-ifstates

Transnational

co-operations

make
decision

collectively
makers,

binding decisions,
virtual organizations.

but at the same time they mutate


One essential consequence is: Old

into fictitious
enterprises were

regulated by the principles of market and hierarchy; their power and their decisions were
economically nowadays same the determined corporations time as and limited, so that also have on the burden to make negotiation of legitimation decisions, trust, and was removed. and they But are at quasi-states political and

fundamentally

dependent

thus

become

thoroughly dependent on legitimation. Furthermore: They become


players result, world without there

legitimation-dependent

a sources As of legitimation. able to draw on public-state-democratic being ? of the economy is a chronic need for trust on the part of the global players unstable. So there is an interesting markets become up, paradox coming extremely

which can be used by NGOs: High power and low legitimation (economy) are confronted with low Power and high legitimation on the side of NGOs. They can utilize it to develop
their The of "legitimation specific of as-if-statehood of world and power". transnational become so to speak, economic evident include meta-power, not least from nation states the scope and that force binding norms are organs".

the norms

economy thus,

the fast as "local

these

conceived

globally,

executive

This is what Renata Ruggerio, the general director of theWorld Trade Organisation was referring to, when he said in 1997: "We are writing the constitution of a single global economy". It is the neo-liberal project, which anticipates globally binding decisions. a universally valid and applicable "policy mix" is being propagated. Accordingly,
According to this, political reforms are to be geared to the standard of economic ? goals

low inflation, balanced budget,


maximum adaptable globally because has freedom welfare active for capital, state which neoliberalism. to the internal

the dismantling

of trade barriers and currency controls,

adjustment the

and a lean of the national labour market regulation are the reform of into work. These its citizens goals pushes can remain In this way, economic power "non-political", ? ? above the global finance markets international economy minimum of "ruling" politics.

become

compass

So we are not living at the 'end of polities', but in a time of translegal meta-politics:
neoliberal regime represents a global reform policy. It envisions a borderless world, not

the
for

labour but for capital. This is becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy through the structural futures are being reform policies initiated by the IMF and World Bank. Neo-liberal I just want to pick up two less familiar criticisms: First the contested on many grounds ?

Springer

This content downloaded on Wed, 6 Feb 2013 21:54:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Int J Polit Cult Soc

(2005)

18:143-159

153

distinction

between

mobility

and migration,

second

the

question

whether

the

neo-liberal

regime is capable of reproducing itself.


In the nation-state 'migration' and paradigm ? 'mobility' of first modernity, indeed, opposite there values is a razor-sharp were typically distinction assigned between to the two.

Population shifts within a national state meant mobility and were highly desired, especially in view of regional imbalances in the labour market. Part of the ideal of the 'flexible worker' is that he or she should go where the jobs are. The fact that this breaks up families,
because wives and mothers are also economically on active and must show 'flexibility', is

constantly ignored by those who are apologists for both market and family.
Mobility between national states, the other hand, is regarded as 'migration' and

subjected to major restrictions. At the border posts, 'desirable flexibility' thus turns into 'undesirable migration', and people who do what is so much demanded within individual
countries seekers' find or themselves being criminalized. who put They are, 'economic of refugees', 'human 'illegal immigrants', themselves in the hands traffickers' 'asylum ?

a task discharged within


citizens who believe

each country by the official employment


values and rights become,

exchange. How
a transnational

can

in universalistic

within

dimension, enemies of the very mobility for which they insistently call inside their own country? Why then does nobody talk about "capital migration" but only about "capital mobility"?
There are well grounded arguments that the neo-liberal regime is not capable of

reproducing itself. Major elements of instability are: financial instabilities: or emerging markets; the series of financial crises in Asia, South America, Russia

'jobless growth'; unemployment, fragile employment, inequality, poverty and exclusion within and between countries and their nexus to conflict, security risks and withdrawal of investors; global environmental and technological risks; the downward trend of corporate taxes and the instability to finance common goods, nationally and globally; and political the market and tensions between freedom, finally capitalism
democracy.

For
regime proper

such

challenges
and privatization

of

the "world
provide no

risk

society"
In fact, for

(Beck,
such

1999) deregulation,
hazards Without the neo-liberal taxation, Without no a

liberalization

remedy.

no is counterproductive: Without taxation, no affordable health-care. Without education,

infrastructure. taxation no

public

sphere.

public sphere no legitimacy. Without legitimacy, no conflict management and no security. To close the circle: Without forums and forms of regulated (that is, recognized and non violent) handling of conflicts, both nationally and globally, there will be no economy
whatsoever.

Third thesis This reveals a central paradox of the neo-liberal model of state and politics: On the one hand, it is orientated to the ideal image of the minimalist state, whose
responsibilities economy. The and state autonomy "as are to be to the tailored global to the enforcement market" has to be of the norms of global and adjusted easily replaceable

completely exchangeable; has to compete with the largest possible number of similar states; is expected to have institutionally internalised the neo-liberal regime of the global market.

4y Springer

This content downloaded on Wed, 6 Feb 2013 21:54:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

154

Int J Polit Cult

Soc

(2005)

18:143-159

On the other hand, however, deregulating themarket and privatizing public assets does not
mean a weak state. What and stepping repression: up border is surveillance sentences, in prospect is a at habeas chipping patrols and being stronger corpus prepared state, or for trial for by example, in matters of jury, increasing as the weapon prison of the

terrorism

weak.

That
by

is, because
the states

legal orders adjusted to the global


and defended against societal

economy must
Above all,

in turn be
a state is

sanctioned

resistance.

needed capable of making


comparable So mobility key of another paradox

absolutely certain thatmobility


is: Globalization means

of capital is not matched by any


borders, a tightening of

labour. reinventing

border controls. Those new borders do not function like the old ones. They look like cheese from Switzerland: They incorporate wholes and uncertainties because of flows of
information, transnational in any capital, people, risks. But because and of the enforcement of must new not borders be on a autonomy in a position their to accept convince societies even states must transnational rules of power. bestow Indeed, post-hoc legitimation come in a completely will often have about undemocratic decisions which manner, way, the political level, power states must be rather, of governments curtailed the and and

which
initiative

simultaneously
to the global

effectively undermine the power of national politics and delegate the


economy. To summarize this central paradox: In order to attain the

goal of neoliberal
simultaneously

restructuring of the world,


and maximised.

the power of the state would

have to be

minimised

Fourth

thesis Why do governments, parties and states find it so difficult to exploit this paradox for the revitalisation of democratic politics? As noted above, corporations with the advantages of mobility and a global network, are able to weaken individual states by
them the more off each other. This extension against dominates the national perspective of the the "translegal and rule" works action of people all the and thinking

playing better

states. The methodological


and consolidates the

nationalism
power

of daily life, politics and scholarship strengthens


of is split up it from preventing states and between states

The world of big companies. of national and competitiveness, the encouragement rivalries, egotism by the mighty of co-operation and extending potential strength discovering transnational enables words, so far the economic actors fixation is the to play of politics second the individual states a decisive off

of finding institutional forms for it. On the principle of divider e et impera, this yet again
against self-defeating each other. mechanism In other (the the national last example constitutes

Iraq war).

At
actual

this point
power

it is useful

to introduce a differentiation
the extent to which state

between potential
strategies can counter

power and
the force

in order

to examine

of capital strategies. The actual power of states' is paralyzed by the twin self-defeating
mechanisms of neoliberalism and of nationalism. Potential state meta-power in turn is

created by the sum of the strategies available to states and governments


this mechanism, trans-national allowing potentials of the de-territorialised politics and control. and de-nationalised answers states to the Political

if they break with


to open newly up new emergent

global economic geography can be found if conceptions and paths of a despatialisation of state, politics and identity are developed and pursued. What does 'despatialisation' of state
mean? binding together taken Governments international in new impose are essentially legal agreements, in a transnational acting ? or as for example because is how cooperative space as soon as they Union negotiate ?join they forms (Beck, of have state 2005, in the European the responsibilities transnational sovereignty"

transnational on obligation spaces of

executives, cooperative on all concerned. This "shared, interactive,

cooperation

create

Springer

This content downloaded on Wed, 6 Feb 2013 21:54:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Int J Polit Cult Soc

(2005)

18:143-159

155

chapter globalization postulate between

5). of

This states

strategy, find

however, themselves politics, the risk If, on

nation-state and the increase state

states

of economic has its price. Under the conditions to the sovereignty in a nationality trap: If they stick the competition investment both for they intensify on the world in which of monopoly-formation market, the other hand, they reduce inter-state competition by

turn weakens

players.

combining and imposing obligations


against national transnational age of This elements national justice, national order to economic paradox which the global programming inventiveness globalization. illustrates used to be a central economy, and

on themselves,

in order to strengthen their position


sovereignty. a hindrance of statehood The to in an

they necessarily narrowness of and

their own national qualify the state thus becomes of the political and

to the development

combined and the

of experience in the national solution of

the

cosmopolitan ?

constellation: national

The

self-determination security) now

become tie each the not

separated others' solution

independence, drive of of action forward action with

problems to surrender Governments have opposed. so to speak, in in cooperative hands, agreements, new to open of central national tasks and up and but and also nationally, sphere. to achieve greater

paradigm central national

independence, like (welfare,

opportunities freedom

only internationally to the opposition respect

the public

Fifth
vital

thesis In order to break free from the nationality trap both in thought and action, it is
to introduce is based a on distinction the equation between of autonomy and and sovereignty. From Methodological that point of view, sovereignty autonomy.

nationalism economic

military, legal and technological co-operation to loss of autonomy between leads and hence loss of sovereignty. ? if sovereignty is equated with economic However, i.e., creating solving political problems ? etc. social state then transnational growth, prosperity, jobs, security increasing in sovereignty: that is, the loss of autonomy in a gain results The political cooperation, to exercise of governments control increases with interstate the and ability cooperation diversification,

cultural dependence, states automatically

subsequent rise in living Standards which thus becomes possible, with their transnational legitimacy (human rights), with their technological and global economic strength. Sharing
sovereignty pooling does not reduce include sovereignty security and but, stability, on the reduce opposite, increases it. Trade-offs of and conflict, reduce military anxiety a loss of autonomy and technological Put differently, spending cooperation. ? can mean to urgent and transnational solutions national such as cooperative problems ? etc. falls in tax revenue, in sovereignty. and thus a gain So there migration, unemployment in de-nationalization, is a "national in sharing interest" in order to solve national sovereignty sovereignty and economic problems.

This insight is central to a cosmopolitan social science: A reduction in (national) autonomy and
a growth in (national) sovereignty by no means logically exclude one another, they are in fact even

capable of mutually strengthening each other. Globalization implies both an increase in the sovereignty of players (for example through theirpotential to act across borders and distances and
thus open up new options) while at the same time leading to a loss of autonomy of entire countries.

The sovereignty of (collective and individual) players grows in proportion to the increase in their dependency. That is to say, the process of globalization goes hand in hand with a shift from
autonomy logic cultural of based the zero on (national) sum game, independent new politics exclusion as we know to sovereignty on (transnational) based inclusion. The it from economic and colonialism, great powers, states and military loses its explanatory blocs, power. breaking the "national sound barrier".

imperialism, In other words: The

nation begins

with

4y Springer

This content downloaded on Wed, 6 Feb 2013 21:54:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

156

Int J Polit Cult Soc

(2005)

18:143-159

Sixth thesis With


theory working another of the state, conditions, way: Who

that the following


be up opened the challenges

question arises: How


of society? Holocaust? the risk The

can the idea of the state, the


of can living also and same question be put

to the challenges of world

transnationalisation

is going

to prevent

the next

My answer is: possibly the cosmopolitan state. The latter is founded on the principle of the national indifferent of the state. Just as the Peace of Westphalia was able to end the religious civil European wars of the 16th and 17th centuries by separating state and
of religion, state so and the national nation. so world Just the as wars only of the the 20th century could state be answered the the by a of of separation different national non-religious state should makes practice

religions

possible,

cosmopolitan

guarantee

co-existent

identities through theprinciple of constitutional tolerance. The curbing of national theology should lead to a redefinition of the scope and frame of action of the political just as did the pushing back of Christian theology at the beginning of modern times in Europe. In themid
17th century, this was inconceivable or even synonymous with the end of the world, and

today it is equally unthinkable for the theorist of the national, because it breaks with the basic idea of the political, the antagonism of friend and foe. And yet, following in the footsteps of Bodin, who defended the sovereignty of the state from the intervention of religion and opened the former to history and politics, itwould be possible to theoretically justify and politically develop this cosmopolitan sovereignty of the state by two principles: the enablement of genuine diversity and being grounded upon fundamental human rights. As already emphasised this does not imply the negation of the national but to its very opposite: the facilitation of national diversity within the new constraints of the global.
So what glitter meaningful adjective determination into avoid aside through indifferent the age and of again? does It the ancient is now which mean, "cosmopolitan" adjective ? to have both and possible "wings" ? without one's rooted renouncing origins The self-determination. presumes cosmopolitan against live whom? How at the two are same the victims time both of has suddenly to begun ? to develop "roots" The cosmopolitanism. question goes: self

affiliations "national" ?

but

self-determination and different? How

it? How

can we

together, between living apart

to choose having or our differences the market and

destructive

equal alternatives: communities,

integrated can we setting

only violence? the post-nation, nation through Only plural-nation, overcome state can possibly in these destructive alternatives nation-tolerant or globalization. The culturally cultural as well So Other means: "cosmopolitan" acknowledging must be present, heard and have both, a voice equality in the

in homogenous

living which

and together communicate

cultural

difference. ? community

as politically.

In the ears of those thinking in national terms, this sounds like a completely unrealistic utopia, and yet many of its basic characteristics are already partly paid lip service, partly
reality. nationalism possible Every country is already to think Europe on that puts democracy to the kind of and human state. rights For me above autocracy only and really the way as a new cosmopolitan transnational, it is thus as-if-state

cosmopolitan

structure,

which draws its political strength precisely from the affirmation and taming of the European
diversity economic certainly The as a cosmopolitan Europe as well as guaranteeing globalization a realistic be or become utopia. of nations. idea of of the state the cosmopolitan nation the unrealistic state the which otherness cooperatively of the others domesticates ? this could

and theory illusion dangerous deregulated economic

state may state, the

defined

self-reliant and

three positions: the against idea of the minimal, neo-liberal of a unified global state.

temptations

Springer

This content downloaded on Wed, 6 Feb 2013 21:54:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Int J Polit Cult Soc

(2005)

18:143-159

157

In reality, Europe, (Beck

state corresponds to the struggle of the cosmopolitan the concept for a political states regularly at each other's is more than a conglomerate of nation throats It is about overcoming & Grande, and the nation ethnic nationalism state, but 2007) which

precisely not by condemning


peaceful continental transnational dream" with co-existence. ethos era. of This

it but by affirming it under the constitutional conditions of


the the renewal state of of law also the and needs You cultivation of to political internalise determined of a European for "American by country the freedom the

requires of democracy,

Figuratively you colour,

its message: skin

Europe speaking: an Other. too can become nation, religion, and ?

are not

of origin, status, A cosmopolitan regard insistence to recognize to Great on

gender!

what that mean, does for example with of national difference In my in the islanders' it is not the opinion, Euro-scepticism their own national civilisation that deserves but rather their inability criticism, not cancel that a cosmopolitan it out but, does cherishes it. rather, Europe Europe Britain?

Europe would not be Europe without the British idea of civilisation. The most important historical event of the 20th century, the defeat of National Socialist terror,would have been inconceivable without the British determination to defend European values in Europe against the Germany in their fascist favour. This is a product of British history, a part of
British not cosmopolitanism Similarly, and dismissed. a founding it is necessary Poland, act of the new Europe which must France, be treasured, cosmopolitan but to discover Spain, Greece, cosmopolitan etc.

Germany,

cosmopolitan

Italy,

Seventh

thesis

Is

the

idea

of

the

cosmopolitan

state

transferable

to other

regions

of

the

world? Indeed, this possibility emerges clearly when comparing the political architecture of cosmopolitan states with national federalism: Both prescribe and establish a highly
differentiated, balanced power structure ? in the rise of federalism within a nation state, in

the case of transnationality between different states. With


conceive These state The can of hybrid forms of a transnational or cosmopolitan gradually, federative through new the seemingly step by step, suspend structures of transnationalisation, of a cosmopolitan, at the intersection interactive of

this in mind,
architecture unbreakable of

it is possible
state federation.

to

without and

of nation and unity a power vacuum. creating state, which systems alternative state of seeks rule of to and

state Option its power is

reflexive and local

reconstitute governance, national and

architecture of false insoluble threat

The authority. of a cosmopolitan state Union a way federalism out of the politics could point ? in particular in regions of chronic state conflicts ethnic-national the alternatives, ? comes conflict Israelis or in the face of the between and Palestinians to mind as in the rise of Hong Kong or Taiwan by China. as one In the case of Israel

global, regional wherever there was the emerging previously only or submission thus state self-determination within national

either

of annexation

this would
consciousness others, devoid

assume
? of a

that Israel reimports


consciousness and of a Jewish hegemonic

its cosmopolitan
collective power.

tradition,
sharing

the diasporic
territory with

exclusiveness

Eighth thesis The enemies of cosmopolitanization are easy to identify and apparently all ? but who would qualify as bearer and supporter of such a cosmopolitan powerful
transformation? modern Modern nationalism emerge was born out of emergent capitalism? national Or cosmopolitanism as a creation of global Could capitalism. is it, vice versa, that

radicalised global capitalism destroys the preconditions bindings and political freedom?

and sources of cultural diversity,

Springer

This content downloaded on Wed, 6 Feb 2013 21:54:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

158
that a cosmopolitan of democracy? I know,

Int J Polit Cult

Soc

(2005)

18:143-159

Is it at all conceivable cosmopolitan revival

capitalism this would

could put

rise the

to become

a factor

in the of the

socialist

perspective

Workers' International upside down. Would it be even possible to forge the subpolitics of investment decisions into an instrument of power with the goal of establishing global rules
for wild capitalism on the one hand, and, on the other, to force the nation states to open up

to cosmopolitanism?
the labour movement serving politics, democracy this merely ? not

Is it at all conceivable

that the right to strike will be transferred from

a movement to an employers' and become investment cosmopolitan the purposes of advertising but also constitutions, only rewriting in alliance with states? Or does transnational and justice regulating cooperating once and false raise false hopes consciousness again?

It is well known that in the social sciences there is nothing more risky than making
prognosis in power long term of especially global in behalf can short of economy, In the the future. Whoever focuses, ? indeed derive experimentally term, the protectionist as well a forces however, ? may on a short ? triumph defenders the increase and term

a
a

heterogeneous democracy religious supposed democrats) World Bank,

prognosis: mix and of

this

is a

of nationalists, the authority In the the integration of

anti-capitalists, the nation term, of state however,

environmentalists,

of national groupings between and the

as xenophobic coalition

fundamentalists. "losers" and the of

long

paradoxical (trade unions, world of served defenders goes

global

economy

environmentalists, trade organisations, ? provided rules. will active

"winners" indeed that

etc.) may recognize

financial (big business, lead to a cosmopolitan their rights, systems. specific interests

markets, renewal are best and

the political by

that both Then, support businesses. framework Ultimately, guarantee dead.

sides

cosmopolitan of for democracy

advocates

of workers' legal

environmentalists This, however,

cosmopolitan At the

globally can also in a be economically successful only day, they themselves and others and social that guarantees security. legal, political, can and democracy extension of state, politics, the cosmopolitan justice only ? ? we are all as we all know But of business. the profit interests ultimately end of the

also

Still the only way


almost from 200 George on years man ago, Bernard

tomake the cosmopolitical


is to act Shaw: 'As "The If it were reasonable to adapt

vision possible, as Immanuel Kant taught


an ironic quote dose with Let me to the world; the himself adapts to himself. all progress Therefore

possible'. man the world

unreasonable depends

persists

in trying man."

the unreasonable

Literature
Polity. (1999). World risk society. Cambridge: of the second Sociology perspective: (2000). The cosmopolitan 57(1), January/March. of Sociology, in the global age. Cambridge: Polity. Beck, U. (2005). Power vision. Cambridge: Beck, U. (2006). The cosmopolitan Polity. Beck, U. Beck, U.

age of modernity.

In British Journal

? Beck, U., Bon?, W., & Lau, C. (2001). Theorie reflexiver Modernisierung Fragestellungen, der Moderne In U. Beck & W. Bon? (Eds.), Die Modernisierung Forschungsprogramme. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp. Beck, U., Giddens, A., & Lash, S. (1994). Reflexive modernization. Cambridge: Polity. Beck, U., & Grande, E. (2007). The Cosmopolitan Europe. Cambridge: Polity. as a research agenda: Theoretical and empirical Beck, U., & Lau, C. (2005). Second modernity in the 'meta-change' of modern 56(4), December. society. In British Journal of Sociology,

Hypothesen, (pp. 11-59).

explorations

Springer

This content downloaded on Wed, 6 Feb 2013 21:54:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Int J Polit Cult Soc

(2005)

18:143-159

159

A research agenda. In British Journal U., & Sznaider, N. (2006). Unpacking cosmopolitanism: of 57(1), March. Sociology, Sociology, special issue: Cosmopolitan E. (2004). Wir und die Anderen. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp. Beck-Gernsheim, Thesen Beisheim, M., Dreher, S., Walter, G., Zang I, B., & Z?rn, M. (1999). Im Zeitalter der Globalisierung? und Daten zur gesellschaftlichen und politischen Baden-Baden: Nomos. Denationalisierung. economics Politics, Held, D., McGrew, A. G., Goldblatt, D., & Perraton, J. (1999). Global transformations: and culture. Cambridge: Polity. Beck, Ong, A. (1999). Flexible citizenship. The cultural logics authority of transnationality. and rights Durham and London: age. Duke Press. University Sassen, S. (2006). Denationalisation: Press. University Soysal, Y. N. University

Territory,

in a global membership

digital

Princeton:

(1994). Limits of citizenship: of Chicago Press.

Migrant

and postnational

in Europe.

Chicago:

4Q Springer

This content downloaded on Wed, 6 Feb 2013 21:54:22 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi