Global Residents in Urban Networks: The Right to Asylum in European Cosmopoleis
The purpose of this chapter is to examine the limitations of our current political structures in incorporating the cosmopolitan principles that may be emerging in the normative developments of our global order. The perspective that I take is explicitly cosmopolitan, although it is elaborated out of an exercise of immanent criticism from within our existing institutional order. This analysis confronts spaces of the incipient articulation of cosmopolitan realities with political models of international legitimacy. This scenario constitutes an example of the incapacity of national state democracies to give a proper account of their foreign duties through national or supranational institutions. We briefly examine two emerging political sites that partially realize cosmopolitan realities in defiance of the national system. The first case is the political space of our metropoleis and their distinctive disposition towards refugees in Europe. The second case is the emergence of a cross-border network of urban connectivity and the alternative characterization of the refugee flows as a constitutive part in this transnational social fabric.
- Álvarez, D. 2012. Individual Membership in a Global Order: Terms of Respect and Standards of Justification. Public Reason 4 (2): 92–118.Google Scholar
- ———. 2017. Democratic Legitimacy, International Institutions and Cosmopolitan Disaggregation. Law, Ethics & Politics 4: 187–199.Google Scholar
- Amin, A. 2012. Land of Strangers. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
- Amin, A., and N. Thrift. 2017. Seeing like a City. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
- Appaduray, A. 2004. The Capacity to Aspire: Culture and the Terms of Recognition. In Culture and Public Action, ed. V. Rao and M. Walton, 59–84. Redwood: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
- Arendt, H. 1973 . The Origins of Totalitarianism. New York: Harvest Books.Google Scholar
- Ascher, F. 1995. Métapolis. Ou, l’avenir des villes. Paris: Éditions Odile Jacob.Google Scholar
- ———. 2009. L’âge des métapoles. La Tour-d’Aigues: Éditions l’Aube.Google Scholar
- Betts, A., and P. Collier. 2017. Refuge. Transforming a Broken Refugee System. London: Allen Lane.Google Scholar
- Blake, M. 2016. Philosophy and the Refugee Crisis. What are the hard Questions? The Critique. [Especial issue –And Who is my Neighbor? Immigration, Human Rights and Sovereignty http://www.thecritique.com/articles/philosophy-the-refugee-crisis-what-are-the-hard-questions/.
- Carens, J.H. 2013. The Ethics of Immigration. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- ———. 2010. Democratic Legitimacy and International Institutions. In The Philosophy of International Law, ed. S. Besson and J. Tasioulas, 119–137. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- ———. 2017. Replies to David Álvarez, David Lefkowitz, and Michael Blake. Law, Ethics & Politics 4: 221–236.Google Scholar
- Fainstein, S. 2010. The Just City. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
- Fassin, D. 2012. Humanitarian Reason. A Moral History of the Present. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
- ———. 2016. From Right to Favor. The refugee Question as Moral Crisis. The Nation. https://www.thenation.com/article/from-right-to-favor/.
- Gibney, M. 2016. Liberal Democratic States and the Problem of the Refugee. Why Do Liebral Democratic States maintain a Commitment to the Institution of Asylum? The Critique. [Especial issue –And Who is my Neighbor? Immigration, Human Rights and Sovereignty http://www.thecritique.com/articles/liberal-democratic-states-the-problem-of-the-refugee-2/.
- Harvey, D. 2013. Rebel Cities. From the Right to the City to the Urban Revolution. London: Verso.Google Scholar
- Laclau, E. 2005. On Populist Reason. London: Verso.Google Scholar
- Lafont, C. 2012. Global Governance and Human Rights, Spinoza Lectures Series. Amsterdam: Van Gorkum.Google Scholar
- Lefebvre, H. 2003. The Urban Revolution. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
- ———. 2012. O Direito à Cidade. Lisbom: Estúdio e Letra Livre.Google Scholar
- Mouffe, C. 2013. Agonistics: Thinking the World Politically. London: Verso.Google Scholar
- ———. 2017. Radical Politics as Counter-Hegemonic Intervention: The Role of Cultural Practices. In Ethics of the Urban. The City and the Spaces of the Political, ed. M. Mostafavi, 209–212. Zürich: Lars Muller Publishers.Google Scholar
- Mouffe, C., and M. Miesse. 2012. The Space of Agonism. In The Space of Agonism. Markus Miessen in Conversation with Chantal Mouffe, ed. N. Hirsch and M. Miessen. Berlin: Stenberg Press.Google Scholar
- Rawls, J. 1999. The Law of Peoples. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- ———. 2010. Between Authority and Interpretation: On the Theory of law and Practical Reason. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Sandercock, L. 2003. Cosmopolis II. In Mongrel Cities in the 2st Century. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
- Sassen, S. 2005. Cityness in the Urban Agen. Urban Age Bulletin 4: 1–3.Google Scholar
- ———. 2006. Territory, Authority, Rights. From Medieval to Global Assemblages. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar