Some self-declared defenders of democracy maintain that a suspension of the ‘cosmopolitan agenda’ is necessary to blunt the appeal of insurgent right wing populism. I argue that cosmopolitans should support this ‘inward turn’ when doing so helps to preserve the long-term viability of that agenda. Cosmopolitans must certainly motivate citizens of different countries to support it. However, they must also encourage those citizens to support democracy and inclusion at home, for support for the cosmopolitan agenda becomes less likely in its (...) absence. Therefore, cosmopolitans should support the inward turn when doing so makes it harder for right wing populists to erode popular support for democracy, inclusion, and the cosmopolitan agenda. Practically speaking, then, cosmopolitanism should not look that different from liberal nationalism in the short-term. Unlike liberal nationalists, though, cosmopolitans should only prioritize the defense of democracy and inclusion at home for practical reasons – not normative reasons. Accordingly, cosmopolitanism should look different from liberal nationalism in the long run, but not radically so. I engage with the empirical literature on public opinion and pay special attention to Lea Ypi’s argument for ‘statist cosmopolitanism.’. (shrink)

This article places Angela Davis’s analysis of why the modern individual trends towards self-isolation in conversation with Alexis de Tocqueville’s competing account in Democracy in America. I argue that Davis misidentifies the problem of isolation as a ‘systems problem’, rather than as a ‘people problem’ (as Tocqueville implies), and that she underestimates the extent to which people’s self-understanding can evolve within the capitalist system. She argues that women’s oppression is a consequence of the isolation which emerges under capitalism, so she (...) believes that the overthrow of capitalism is required to overcome it. Yet much progress in redressing women’s oppression has been achieved within capitalism as a result of its recent troubles. Accordingly, I suggest that Tocqueville offers a plausible theory of reform that can help feminists continue to rectify women’s oppression within the capitalist system. Specifically, feminists should heed Tocqueville’s counsel, that smart institutional interventions can help reform how people understand themselves, and focus on designing policies which can encourage people to move away from the belief that women are more naturally suited to domestic labour than men. (shrink)

This book investigates how citizens who have differences and disagreements ought to relate to one another in a liberal democracy. Specifically, this book advances a metaphor of citizenship that I call 'role-based constitutional fellowship.' Role-based constitutional fellowship, I argue, is a desirable way for citizens to relate to one another in conditions of modern pluralism, where multiple races, ethnicities, religions, and economic statuses exist ('difference') and where citizens adhere to and pursue competing political interests, creeds, and objectives ('disagreement'). Under role-based (...) constitutional fellowship, citizens share a sense that they are united in a common aim and that they are largely committed to doing what is necessary to pursue that aim - that they are fellows. I describe this sense of fellowship as constitutional and role-based. (shrink)