COSMOPOLITANISM, POPULISM, AND DEMOCRACY
And eas Michel
Rose-Hulman Ins i u e o Technology, Te e Hau e, Indiana, USA
Abs ac
The opic o my pape is he a ack on cosmopoli anism e e since he G ea Recession.
Since 2008, populis eac ions o he ill e ec s o globalisa ion ha e sp ung up in many
Wes e n coun ies. Thei a ge is he pos -WW II poli ical consensus—a leas as a as
Eu ope is conce ned—o an ‘e e close union,’ a policy based on 20 h cen u y his o y
and a new cosmopoli an sensibili y. This sensibili y is now unde a ack—B exi being
only he mos isible sign—and calls o a new na ionalism ha e e u ned o bo h sides o
he A lan ic. Fo a Wes -Ge man ci izen bo n a e he wa , such a ocus on he na ion
was ou o he ques ion o all he well-known easons. In his pape I engage wi h he
c i ics o cosmopoli anism, explo ing bo h populis and libe al objec ions o i . As a
esul , I a i e a a mo e nuanced posi ion ha akes s ock o he nega i e e ec s o
globaliza ion. I sugges ha he oad o wa d—a leas o he o eseeable u u e—migh
well be a di ision o labou be ween he Eu opean na ion s a es and a cosmopoli an
sensibili y.
Keywo ds: Cosmopoli anism, Eu opean Union, globalisa ion, na ionalism, populism.
I would like o s a wi h a quo e om A e Eu ope, I an K as e ’s 2017
medi a ion on he u u e o he Eu opean Union. K as e ’s book is no a swan
song o he Eu opean Union. Ra he , he ies o ind an explana ion o he ising
disenchan men wi h his ins i u ion as el in many o i s membe s a es. In he
p ocess, he submi s he ollowing bi u ca ed obse a ion on cosmopoli anism,
which I will use o se he s age o my e lec ions on he challenge ha oday’s
populis mo emen s pose o my own cosmopoli an belie s. The bi u ca ion
alludes o he di e en ways Wes e n and Cen al Eu opeans concei e o
ansna ional, o cosmopoli an, ideas. K as e sugges s ha :
And eas Michel, Cosmopoli anism, Populism, and Democ acy
154
he Ge man d i e o cosmopoli anism was […] a way o escape he
xenophobic legacy o Nazism, while i could be a gued ha Cen al
Eu ope’s an i-cosmopoli anism is pa ially oo ed in an a e sion o a
communis imposed in e na ionalism […] (In Wes e n Eu ope, 1968
symbolizes he endo semen o cosmopoli an alues, while in he Eas i
s ands o he ebi h o na ional sen imen s). (K as e , 2017, p. 57)
Wha I ind so ins uc i e abou his s a emen is ha he mo e owa ds
in e na ionalism o cosmopoli anism—is ei he welcomed o ejec ed on he basis
o a na ion’s his o y. No only do hese diame ically opposed eac ions o a
pos - na ional Eu ope help explain he gap in he Eu opean handling o e ugees
in Wes e n and Cen al Eu ope (Me kel: humbs up; O ban: humbs down); hey
poin , in addi ion, o he cul u al and poli ical oo s o hese di e gen policies.
K as e ’s ema k hus p o ides a i s indica ion ha he populis challenge o
cosmopoli anism needs o be aken se iously a he han o be ejec ed ou o
hand as undemoc a ic in e en ion. In wha ollows I will pass in e iew ecen
challenges o he iew ha cosmopoli anism ep esen s he a ow o his o y. I
will use he e m cosmopoli anism in he way K as e unde s ands i : namely, as
he unde lying d i e o a Eu opean pos -Wo ld Wa II ision o build a uni ed
Eu ope, an ‘e e close union,’ in which, ideally, and e en ually, na ional
so e eign y ge s dissol ed in Eu opean so e eign y.
In no coun y, pe haps, was his d i e o a Eu opean uni ica ion s onge han in
Wes Ge many. The bu den o he Nazi c imes commi ed in he name and wi h
he suppo o he Ge man people, p ohibi ed, a e 1945, a pa io ic ocus on
he na ion. In he Wes Ge many I g ew up in, no all, o be su e, bu a la ge
majo i y o poli icians and ci izens ejec ed exp essions o na ionalis sen imen
in any shape o o m. In i s s ead, hey espoused a Eu opean cosmopoli anism
o , a he e y leas , mul ila e alism. Led by he ision o a uni ed Eu ope ha
would see no mo e wa s, cosmopoli an-minded Ge mans, e en a e he all o
he Wall, we e Eu opeans long be o e hey ecei ed Eu opean passpo s. Looking
back om oday’s an age, he decision in a o o cosmopoli anism as a
bulwa k agains na ionalism was a e y success ul unde aking.
NOTES ON EUROPE. The Dogma ic Sleep
P oceedings. Po o, Oc obe 29-31 2019
155
Wha we a e lea ning he ha d way oday, howe e , is ha , along wi h
na ionalism, cosmopoli ans ejec ed he na ion s a e in gene al. No in eali y, o
cou se, bu po en ially. Fo , as is qui e plain o see, no only do he Eu opean
na ion s a es s ill exis bu hey also wield poli ical powe commensu a e wi h
hei economic s eng h. In o he wo ds, na ion s a es con inue o exis
alongside he cosmopoli an p ojec o he Eu opean Union. Ye , in heo y, he
goal o a uly cosmopoli an ision is o s ep by s ep me ge hese na ion s a es
in o one so e eign Eu opean s a e—whose ci izens would e en ually ag ee wi h
Emmanuel Mac on’s exclama ion “B ussels is us”—made du ing his Ini ia i e o
Eu ope speech a he So bonne in Sep embe 2017. Today’s populis
mo emen s, howe e , mos a den ly he suppo e s o B exi , a e opposed
p ecisely o his endgame o cosmopoli anism.
As a Ge man, bo n in 1955, i was “na u al” o be a de ende o cosmopoli anism
and o Eu opean in eg a ion. Bu gi en he ecen populis a acks on
cosmopoli an eli es as well as he claim o a democ a ic de ici in he go e nance
o he EU, I eel he need o e- examine my own p emises. In a i s s ep, I will
pass in e iew he poli ical objec ions ha ecen populis mo emen s ha e
le eled agains Eu ope’s cosmopoli an aspi a ions. In a second s ep, I will
in e oga e he heo e ical a gumen s le eled agains cosmopoli an democ acy
e en by some de ende s o cosmopoli anism. I will hen sugges ha a e-
concep ualized cosmopoli anism is ne e heless indispensable o Eu opean
in eg a ion and a peace ul wo ld.
I. The Populis Challenge
Populism i sel is no an ideology, i by ideology we mean o designa e a
pa icula se o belie s as hey a e o example ensh ined in eligious doc ines
o pa y pla o ms. Populis s, a he , in he wo ds o E nes o Laclau, ‘cons uc a
poli ical on ie di iding socie y in o wo camps and calling o he mobiliza ion
o he “unde dog” agains “ hose in powe ”’ (quo ed in Mou e, 2018, pp. 10-11).
Populis s he e o e display an ‘us’ s. ‘ hem’ men ali y, wi h ‘us’ being he
people, while ‘ hem’ e e s o a pe cei ed eli e. This o malis concep ion o
And eas Michel, Cosmopoli anism, Populism, and Democ acy
156
populism does no exclude ha , a any pa icula poin in his o y, a populis
e ol has a p ecise poli ical con en , pu pose, o agenda when i e up s. All we
need o do is look o B exi o con i ma ion. Bu because he populis momen
has no co e se o belie s, is no a ached o any pa y pla o m, he e ol o he
unde dogs o ‘le -behinds’ (Goodha , 2017) is mo e easily co-op ed, e en high-
jacked, by demagogues who ill he populis ou age wi h an i- libe al and an i-
democ a ic con en .
In he ecen li e a u e on populism, i we zoom ou a enough, we can disce n
wo schools o hough when i comes o he legi imacy o populism as a
democ a ic ool. Fo some, populism is seen as a poli ical means o p o es an
eli e’s neglec o hei i al in e es s: Goodha (2017), Judis (2016), Koppe sch
(2019), Manow (2018), and Mou e (2019) a e in his camp. Fo o he s,
howe e , populism poses a di ec dange o libe al democ acy because o i s
an i-plu alis s ance: see Gals on (2018), K as e (2017), Mudde (2017), and
Mülle (2016).
Fo he i s g oup, populism eme ges as a legi ima e poli ical eac ion o eal
exis ing inequali ies ha a e no on he ada o uling eli es. Populism he e
ep esen s he p essu e om below wi hou which impo an changes o he
poli ical landscape will ne e happen. I is he e o e seen as a democ a ic
coun e weigh . I handled wi hou gi ing in o au ho i a ian, na ionalis , o
na i is seduc ion, such a o m o democ a ic populism could e en be help ul in
s abilizing he poli ical sys em. The ield o hose who see populism as a
legi ima e ac i i y includes de ende s o na ional populism (Ea well and Goodwin,
2019) as well as le is populism (Mou e, 2018). Bo h camps see populis
in e en ions as he hones exp ession o a disad an aged sec ion o he
popula ion oicing legi ima e complain s agains an eli e, while s aying wi hin he
bounds o libe al democ acy.
The second school o hough conside s populism an undemoc a ic, and he e o e
illegi ima e, ool o poli ical change—in spi e o he ac ha i s ep esen a i es
also ecognize he alidi y o he populis complain s agains he eli es. Howe e ,
hey conside he populis s’ poli ical demands as bu a smokesc een. Fo hem,
NOTES ON EUROPE. The Dogma ic Sleep
P oceedings. Po o, Oc obe 29-31 2019
157
populis he o ic is an i-plu alis in o ien a ion and he eal dange comes o ligh
once populis s a e in powe (as in Cen al Eu opean coun ies oday), o hen
hey s a o e ode libe al ins i u ions. This is because populis s assume hei
oice is he au hen ic oice o he people, which makes all o he poli ical
posi ions no jus di e en bu inau hen ic. Thei au hen ici y, hey a gue, gi es
hem he igh o cu ail o abolish undamen al ins i u ions o libe al democ acy,
such as he s a e o law (Rech ss aa ), he di ision o powe s, and he eedom
o he p ess. In he wo ds o I an K as e :
Wha cha ac e izes populis s in powe a e hei cons an a emp s o
disman le he sys em o checks and balances and o b ing independen
ins i u ions like cou s, cen al banks, media ou le s, and ci il socie y
o ganiza ions unde hei con ol.
Populis s and adical pa ies a en’ jus pa ies; hey a e cons i u ional
mo emen s. They p omise o e s wha libe al democ acy canno : a sense
o ic o y whe e majo i ies—no jus poli ical majo i ies, bu e hnic and
eligious ones, oo—can do wha hey please.
The ise o hese pa ies is symp oma ic o he explosion o h ea ened
majo i ies as a o ce in Eu opean poli ics. They blame he loss o con ol
o e hei li es, eal o imagined, on a conspi acy be ween cosmopoli an-
minded eli es and ibal-minded immig an s. They blame libe al ideas and
ins i u ions o weakening he na ional will and e oding na ional uni y.
They end o see comp omise as co up ion and zealousness as con ic ion.
(K as e , 2017, pp. 75-6)
Thus, while bo h schools o hough ag ee ha he populis e ol s ems om
opposi ion o eli es, i is he second o whom he ue na u e o populism
su aces in he an i-democ a ic slippage ha occu s when legi ima e complain s
o a loss in poli ical solida i y ake he o m o an i- libe al, au ho i a ian poli ics.
Fo he dange is ha , o he loss o solida i y o be egained, populis s o en
make use o e hnic o eligious na ionalism.

And eas Michel, Cosmopoli anism, Populism, and Democ acy
158
Thus, while populism o he i s kind looks o es ablish poli ical solida i y in
democ a ic ashion, he second—po en ially—concei es solida i y on he p e-
poli ical le el o he na ion as e hnic o eligious communi y whe e, a leas
po en ially, non-na ional o he s may be pe secu ed. John B. Judis (2016) e e s
o he i s kind o populism as dyadic (people/eli e) and o he second as a
iadic (people/eli e/o he o blame]. This deba e abou he ue na u e o
populism is in ull swing and bo h sides ha e se ious a gumen s on hei side.
Wha is in e es ing o my pu poses is ha , in bo h cases, whe he as animus
agains he eigning eli e o as h ea o he ins i u ions o plu alis democ acy,
cosmopoli anism inds i sel in populism’s line o i e. This is so because
cosmopoli ans a e seen as lacking, e en as challenging he kind o solida i y
populis s wan o eclaim.
II. Cosmopoli anism, Globaliza ion, and he P oblem o Solida i y
In o de o see i his assessmen o cosmopoli anism is jus i ied, we need o dig
deepe . Since he mid-1990s, a g ea numbe o books and essay collec ions on
cosmopoli anism ha e appea ed, among hem A chibugi (2003), B ock and
B ighouse (2005), B own and Held (2010), B ecken idge (2002), Cheah and
Robbins (1998), Robbins and Lemon Ho a (2017), and Ve o ec and Cohen
(2002). These di e en collec ions in e oga e cosmopoli anism om all poin s o
iew: sys ema ic, his o ical, philosophical, e hical, poli ical, sociological, and
Eu ocen ic.
One o he easons o his busy publishing ac i i y is he challenge o which he
idea o cosmopoli anism has been pu in he wake o wha Dani Rod ik (2019)
has called hype -globaliza ion—an economic end which i sel is he esul o
d as ically changed poli ical ci cums ances since he ea ly 1990s. A e he all o
communism, he economic and poli ical al e na i es o Wes e n-s yle libe alism
and capi alism seemed exhaus ed. Some e en sugges ed ha His o y,
unde s ood as he sequence o economic and poli ical o ma ions, had come o
an end. Buoyed by his sen imen , laissez- ai e capi alism and neolibe alism
NOTES ON EUROPE. The Dogma ic Sleep
P oceedings. Po o, Oc obe 29-31 2019
159
unde w o e he libe aliza ion o wo ld ma ke s including he ee low o people,
p oduc s, and capi al ac oss in e na ional bo de s.
As i u ns ou , hype -globaliza ion while i con ibu ed o economic g ow h
du ing he las 25 yea s, has also b ough abou immense inequali ies. The
eason o he ailu e o hype -globaliza ion, as Rod ik sees i , is wo- old: a i s
ailu e consis s in he ac ha since ade will p oduce compa a i e ad an ages
o some and disad an ages o o he s, he in e na ional communi y should ha e
aken ca e o he lose s o he libe aliza ion o ma ke s. Tha did no happen.
Ra he , a b oad sec ion o he middle classes in he US and Eu ope we e le
behind; blaming he eli es o hei a e, hey ha e los all us in he sys em. A
second ailu e o hype -globaliza ion is o be seen in he ac ha mul i-na ional
companies and in e na ional o ganiza ion we e allowed o dic a e ules and
egula ions ac oss in e na ional bo de s ha clashed wi h deeply held alues
abou egula o y di e si y o na ional au onomy. Fo Rod ik, he ouble s a ed
when hype -globaliza ion, a he han se ing he b oad economic in e es s o
he wo ld communi y, came o be seen as an end in i sel .
The low o people ac oss bo de s— his is whe e cosmopoli anism comes in. Fo
he globaliza ion o ade included he ise o a new class o p o essionals and
echnoc a s wi hou na ional oo s, whose alues, in e es s, connec ions, and
iden i ica ion a e no wi h hei immedia e en i onmen , bu a he wi h
“ oo less” people like hemsel es, be hey in a away places o in he
neighbo hood. Da id Goodha (2017) who esea ched his phenomenon in he
case o B exi , labeled his new class he Anywhe es. Wha uni es hem is ha
hei alues and iden i ica ions a e no oo ed in he na ion. On he con a y,
hey p ide hemsel es on ha ing a b oade iew because hey a e no longe
a ached o a na ional communi y. They a e he new cosmopoli ans, he winne s
o globaliza ion, who a e a luen , able o mo e o a di e en place when imes
ge ha d. The Somewhe es on he o he hand, a e he locals, hose who canno
and do no wan o lea e hei local a achmen s. Many o hem ha e been lose s
o globaliza ion who eel ha hei li elihood, hei adi ions, hei coun y, and
hei na ion is in dange o being ans o med by policies and ideologies designed
by a a -o Eu opean Union o he bene i o he oo less Anywhe es. In
And eas Michel, Cosmopoli anism, Populism, and Democ acy
160
Goodha ’s iew his is he eason why he Somewhe es o ed o lea e he
Eu opean Union. Thus, he e ec s o globaliza ion a e he e iden i ied as he
culp i ha ueled he populis explosion leading o a na ionalis backlash in
England as well as in o he libe al democ acies.
This is he i s poin I concede o he populis challenge. I ind i ha d no o
ag ee wi h his c i ique o an economic cosmopoli anism ha as a esul o
hype -globaliza ion has led o economic ha dship o hose who canno compe e
wi h he new cosmopoli an eali ies. I am con inced ha globaliza ion
con ibu ed o his s a e o a ai s, and he lack o na ional and EU a en ion o
he a e o ce ain segmen s o B i ish socie y has led o a loss o a sense o
solida i y ha ge s exp essed in populis ange .
Ye he c i ique o cosmopoli anism does no only come om he populis s. A
simila c i ique o cosmopoli an democ acy comes om he discipline o poli ical
sociology ha , on a mo e heo e ical le el, sha es some o populism’s p incipal
complain s. I am hinking in pa icula o he wo k o C aig Calhoun. As i u ns
ou , he c ux he e, as in populism is he no ion o solida i y.
III. Cosmopoli anism, Na ionalism, and he Na ion S a e
“Na ionalism is no a mo al mis ake” (Calhoun, 2007, p. 1). This i s sen ence o
C aig Calhoun’s collec ion o essays published in 2007 unde he i le Na ions
Ma e eally hi me when I i s ead i . I hi me because—as a p oponen o
cosmopoli anism— his is p ecisely how I hough abou na ionalism—as a mo al
mis ake. Since his is he i s sen ence o he book, I assume I was no he only
one o hink so.
The sen ence is wo h epea ing along wi h he pa ag aph ha ollows:
Na ionalism is no a mo al mis ake. Ce ainly i is oo o en implica ed in
a oci ies, and in mo e banal bu s ill unjus p ejudices and disc imina o y
p ac ices. I oo o en makes people hink a bi a y bounda ies a e na u al
and con empo a y global di isions ancien and ine i able. Bu i is also a
NOTES ON EUROPE. The Dogma ic Sleep
P oceedings. Po o, Oc obe 29-31 2019
161
o m o social solida i y and one o he backg ound condi ions on which
mode n democ acy has been based. I has helped secu e domes ic
inclusion and edis ibu i e policies e en while i has inhibi ed
cosmopoli an a en ion o he needs o non-na ionals. Na ionalism helps
loca e an expe ience o belonging in a wo ld o global lows and ea s.
Some imes i unde w i es s uggle agains he an as ically unequal and
exploi a i e e ms on which global in eg a ion is being achie ed.
We should app oach na ionalism wi h c i ical a en ion o i s limi s,
illusions, and po en ial o abuse, bu we should no dismiss i . E en
whe e we a e deeply c i ical o he na ionalism we see, we should
ecognize he con inued impo ance o na ional solida i ies. E en i we
wish o a mo e cosmopoli an wo ld o de , we should be ealis ic enough
no o ac on me e wishes. (Calhoun, 2017, p. 1)
A e much soul sea ching, and in spi e o my pe sonal con ic ions, I end o
ag ee wi h Calhoun ha abs ac cosmopoli anism, as in he case o my “na u al”
suppo o he EU, has a ha d ime p o iding a sense o belonging as long as
na ional popula ions in i s membe s a es do no eel ha hei in e es s a e
ep esen ed. As long as ha is he case, hey will— igh ly— all back on he
na ional solida i ies hey a e used o and eel suppo ed by.
I am also in ag eemen wi h Calhoun’s poin ha na ional solida i ies a e
p o iding he backg ound condi ions o libe al democ acy o unc ion. His main
poin is ha , his o ically speaking, democ acy does bes when i is linked o a
na ion s a e ha p o ides he amewo k o he g ow h o social solida i y as
well as a sense o belonging. Th ough sha ed adi ion, eligion, and cul u e, he
na ion gua an ees and os e s meaning ul iden i ica ions. He e laws a e c ea ed
and enac ed, policies a e made, and he balance be ween he ee ma ke and
he wel a e s a e is wo ked ou . As John B. Judis ema ks in The Na ionalis
Re i al: ‘Democ acy needs a “We.”’ People make sac i ices (e.g., pay axes, go
o wa ) only i hey iden i y wi h he communi y ha demands hem. Tha is o
say, people ac his way only i hey eel hey ha e a oice in he communi y;
hence he link be ween democ acy and na ionalism.