ABSTRACT
Furedi contends that contemporary cosmopolitanism has little in common with its original version, which conveyed a positive aspiration for the realisation of the universalist ideals of humanism. In its contemporary form, cosmopolitanism not only calls into question national borders but also fundamental political categories such as sovereignty (national, popular, and individual), citizenship, and democracy. Consequently, critics of national borders are also suspicious of democracy, especially in its majoritarian form. They regard sovereignty as an outdated myth if not always a coercive instrument of exclusion. They denigrate the status of citizenship as endowing individuals with an unfair advantage over those people who do not possess it. Moreover, the ideology of openness negates the singularity of the individual and unbounds them from their cultural norms. Open border advocates decry the idea of a people as a self-serving mystification designed to artificially divide the human race. This chapter questions the project of delegitimating territorial borders. It argues that what is at stake in this debate is not simply the status of territorial borders but the value of citizenship and ultimately of the role of democracy.
