Juergen Habermas's critical theoretical cosmopolitanism

This dissertation assesses Jurgen Habermas's critical theoretical cosmopolitanism with a view to his intervention into the very recent scene of the post-Westphalian world order. Guided by the multifaceted theme of the dualism between idealism and realism, it offers an account of Habermas's treatment of the contemporary global situation---e.g., the catastrophes of the twentieth century, the accelerated present of globalization---where the sovereign nation-state is no longer the viable frame for many theorists of justice. In a comparative view, this dissertation also juxtaposes Habermas's critical theoretical framework to opponents in the liberal and communitarian traditions, primarily John Rawls and Charles Taylor, and to certain sympathetic critics.; What emerges is Habermas's strongly normative and realistic reconstruction of Kant's theory of cosmopolitan right for our times, where the full range of the cosmopolitan rights of the associated world citizens are to be articulated and protected within the framework of his neo-Kantian and neo-Marxist discourse theory of law and democracy---with gestures towards Hegel. It is argued that Habermas's emphases on proper democratic and legal institutionalization and on a juridical as well as a moral construal of human rights that follow from his 'political' reading of Kant constitute theoretical strengths. In more concrete terms, what is involved is a more strictly legal cosmopolitanism at the global level, and his more circumscribed conception of political cosmopolitanism as a 'world governance' involving extant states working in tandem with regional entities such as the European Union and a strengthened United Nations.; When juxtaposed to Habermas's theory, the idealism of Rawls's and Taylor's partially 'international' conceptions appear theoretically more limited. These thinkers approach material interests and cultural contexts in 'thicker' terms and less critically than Habermas, are more pluralistic with respect to extant political traditions and their future, and have different interpretations of Kant. Reading through their lenses will, perhaps more realistically, confirm the fact that particularisms and nationalisms are still effective forces even in Western developed countries. Finally, I draw in certain sympathetic critics of Habermas and conclude that they can help improve Habermas's optimistic vision by reemphasizing and reinterpreting the (political) cultural.