Abstract
AbstractThe paper deals with the question whether cosmopolitanism is still a relevant concept for conflict resolution and peacebuilding. First, three common criticisms of cosmopolitanism are addressed, namely that it is Eurocentric, elitist and hegemonic. The paper concludes that these criticisms tend to focus on a limited liberal understanding of cosmopolitanism that does not do justice to the diversity of the concept. A redefinition and renarration of cosmopolitanism from a postcolonial standpoint is therefore necessary. Such a definition can only be an open minimal definition that leaves room for appropriation and localisation. This new, global perspective on cosmopolitanism is then evaluated against the background of conflict resolution in practice. The relevance of the concept becomes apparent when looking at the presence of elitist cosmopolitanism in the field.
Funder
Otto-von-Guericke-Universität Magdeburg
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference96 articles.
1. Adloff, Frank, and Volker Heins (eds.). 2015. Konvivialismus. Eine Debatte. Bielefeld: transcript.
2. Al-Makassary, Ridwan. 2019. Transnationalism and Transnational Islam in Indonesia with Special Emphasis on Papua. International Journal of Interreligious and Intercultural Studies 2(2):42–59.
3. Albahari, Miri. 2011. Nirvana and Ownerless Consciousness. In Self, No self? Perspectives from Analytical, Phenomenological, and Indian Traditions, ed. Mark Siderits, Evan Thompson, and Dan Zahavi, 79–113. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
4. Álvarez-Huerta, Paula, Alexander Muela, and Iñaki Larrea. 2022. Disposition toward critical thinking and creative confidence beliefs in higher education students: The mediating role of openness to diversity and challenge. Thinking Skills and Creativity (43):1–9.
5. American Museum of Natural History. 2002. Einstein’s deeply held political beliefs. https://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/einstein/global-citizen.