ABSTRACT
Accounts of the relationship between cosmopolitanism and borders usually centre on the ability of cosmopolitans to cross borders with ease, or even live across borders (Holton 2009: 40). According to such accounts the novel aspect of the relationship is the facility with which borders can be crossed, in line with the idea that the rise of cosmopolitanism equates to the decline of the nation-state. In this chapter I advance the argument that this is a far too simplistic account of the relationship between borders and cosmopolitanism, and one which places too much faith in a ‘new cosmopolitanism’ account of the ability of cosmopolitanism to supplant the nation-state (Fine 2007). What is not properly considered in these accounts is the changing nature of borders. In short, many accounts of the relationship between cosmopolitanism and borders suppose some kind of enhanced cosmopolitan agency which makes borders easier to cross, but do not give due consideration to the changing nature of borders. As we will see in the following section the changes are extensive and wide-ranging. In any case, under conditions of globalization the ability to cross borders is not such an impressive achievement. When a national border is marked by nothing more substantial than a signpost at the side of the (open) road, as many borders internal to the European Union are, what freedom or mobility is represented by crossing such a border?
