The role of Cosmopolitan Right within Kant’s project of peace is still a matter of debate. Moving from a critical survey of the main strands of this discussion (§ 1), this article questions the common view, according to which Kant’s Cosmopolitan Right expresses the trust in the development of a shared moral sensitivity for faraway injustices, fostered by global communication (§ 2). Against this view, it puts to the forefront the systematic reasons that enables to regard Kant’s Cosmopolitan Right as a strictly juridical response to the nexus between symbolic misrecognition, wrongful land’s acquisitions and war – a nexus which Kant acknowledges as a distinctive feature and risk of the interactions between geographically and culturally distant moral persons, such as members of European states and non-state groups beyond Europe (§ 3).
Cosmopolitan Right and Peace
Picardi
In corso di stampa
Abstract
The role of Cosmopolitan Right within Kant’s project of peace is still a matter of debate. Moving from a critical survey of the main strands of this discussion (§ 1), this article questions the common view, according to which Kant’s Cosmopolitan Right expresses the trust in the development of a shared moral sensitivity for faraway injustices, fostered by global communication (§ 2). Against this view, it puts to the forefront the systematic reasons that enables to regard Kant’s Cosmopolitan Right as a strictly juridical response to the nexus between symbolic misrecognition, wrongful land’s acquisitions and war – a nexus which Kant acknowledges as a distinctive feature and risk of the interactions between geographically and culturally distant moral persons, such as members of European states and non-state groups beyond Europe (§ 3).I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
