ABSTRACT
I summarise the benefits of fusing the horizons of statism and cosmopolitanism, and discuss the plausibility and implausibility of the general theory. In other words, I examine possible arguments for and against my fusion of the horizons of statism and cosmopolitanism. Firstly, I present the argument for plausibility which says that fusion of horizons accommodates the complexity of resource curse. Secondly, I examine the first kind of arguments for implausibility namely mutual exclusivity, incompatibility, relativism, neutrality and aerial view. Thirdly, I examine the second kind of arguments for implausibility namely motivation, slippery slope, international system and consensus. Finally, since there might be a possible misconception that my adopted fusion of horizons is a new theory of global justice that negates statism and cosmopolitanism, I disclaim the notion that my adopted fusion of horizons is a new theory of global justice that negates statism and cosmopolitanism. However, I argue that fusion of horizons is general theory of global justice which partly relies on statism and partly relies on cosmopolitanism.
