ABSTRACT
The composition of the social world is being transformed. If we take the homogeneous national society as an ideal type in the sense defined by Weber, then what we see is a shift from internal interaction to cross-border interaction. In more and more social arenas and contexts, people are meeting and establishing social relationships with members of other ethnic or national groups. It is increasingly difficult, in the age of globalization, to think of national collectives in the old terms of geographic demarcation and social isolation. Some observers see this as the transition to a post-national society where divisions between national collectives play a diminished role and distinctions between “fellow countrymen” and “foreigners” are reduced. The basic principle of cosmopolitanism is that the “other” can be both different and equal (cf. Beck 2006: 58f.). In such a world, national membership would no longer be the basis for subordinating, discriminating against, or refusing to recognize the rights of any other human being or group of human beings. In practical terms, this translates into everything from mundane contacts between individuals of different national, cultural, or ethnic origins – in restaurants, supermarkets, workplaces, and so forth – to the institutional and legal basis for nondiscrimination and full participation. Sheila Benhabib (1998: 108) summed up these cosmopolitan ideals with her remark that “democracies should be judged not only by how they treat their members, but by how they treat their strangers.” Beck describes cosmopolitanism as the willingness to extend “the boundaries of ethical solidarity so as to create opportunities for both internal and external outsiders to participate” (2006: 104-5).
