ABSTRACT
This chapter looks at the main contemporary criticisms of a specifically political cosmopolitanism and formulates them as a dilemma between legitimacy and effectiveness at the international level. It shows how G. W. F. Hegel improves upon these criticisms by explicitly arguing for the importance of bounded communities in achieving the political goods of administration and membership. Hegel's anti-cosmopolitanism is in part motivated by his diagnosis of the lack of integration of modern society. While the problem of the modern state is that power has been organized, communities organized from below "gained too great a degree of self-sufficiency, when they became states within the state and behaved in an obdurate manner like independently established bodies". Political cosmopolitanism argues that a dispersal of functions permits the international community to distribute important rights of exit and voice more fairly than in the current system for organizing legitimacy and effectiveness.
