Inclusion and Exclusion in the Cosmospolis

Cosmopolitanism is often associated with a general open-mindedness, a sense of universal equality and unity and the global awareness of the world as a whole. In fact, it cannot be denied that we live in a global world. There are (still) nation-states and borders, there is the division between periphery and centre, there are local bonds, but there is the vision and the reality of the globe: the shape of our world. Today, networks of finance and power, communication and transportation penetrate the whole planet. And even those who (for good reasons) deny the benefits of globalisation cannot ignore the dimension of truly global threats: global warming, global diseases, global war… Important questions need to be answered: Which forms of difference can be »tolerated« in the Cosmopolis and how to deal with fundamental, oppositional differences? Further: How is it justified to make differences, i.e. how to distribute goods and rights? And, like any society, but with a much increased level of sensitivity, cosmopolitan world society would have to address the related question of inclusion and exclusion, because an exclusion from the Cosmopolis would, in fact, mean an exclusion from humanity. I will start with an exploration of the literal and latent meaning(s) of cosmopolitanism: delving into the term and mapping its metaphorical »cosmos«. This (re)search s important since imaginative inclusions and exclusions are crucial for possible practical translations, and a serious investigation of the metaphorical content and a history of the »terminological objects« may provide in addition new directions for both practical and theoretical orientation.