Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 5 (4):431-461 (2002)

Kok-Chor Tan
University of Pennsylvania
Many liberals have argued that a cosmopolitan perspective on global justice follows from the basic liberal principles of justice. Yet, increasingly, it is also said that intrinsic to liberalism is a doctrine of nationalism. This raises a potential problem for the liberal defense of cosmopolitan justice as it is commonly believed that nationalism and cosmopolitanism are conflicting ideals. If this is correct, there appears to be a serious tension within liberal philosophy itself, between its cosmopolitan aspiration on the one hand, and its nationalist agenda on the other. I argue, however, that this alleged conflict between liberal nationalism and cosmopolitan liberalism disappears once we get clear on the scope and goals of cosmopolitan justice and the parameters of liberal nationalism. Liberal nationalism and cosmopolitan global justice, properly understood, are mutually compatible ideals.
Keywords cosmpolitanism  culture  egalitarianism  global justice  justice as impartiality  liberal nationalism  liberalism  national partiality  nationalism  self-determination
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1023/A:1021339410934
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 69,257
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Boundary Making and Equal Concern.Kok-Chor Tan - 2005 - Metaphilosophy 36 (1‐2):50-67.
Movement as Utopia.Philippe Couton & José Julián López - 2009 - History of the Human Sciences 22 (4):93-121.

View all 7 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles


Added to PP index

Total views
180 ( #64,314 of 2,499,855 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #278,202 of 2,499,855 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes