Another section of capitalism needing more study according to scholars in general is; how the Constitution relates to all citizens as a whole in regards to traditions, values and such. Cosmopolitans seek to bridge this gap and then promote it on a larger world scale.
Liberalism
Liberalism is not as tolerant of the world community as many people would be lead to believe. Liberalist view themselves more along the lines of referees to the world's problems and fail to treat all people of the world as equals. In the article, "Human Rights and Cosmopolitan Liberalism," Anthony Langlois states, "liberalism must be egalitarian towards all the conceptions of the good life held by these individuals. Such extension of liberalism's tolerance and egalitarianism would in fact undermine liberalism's core values and render the cosmopolitan project a series of contradictions in terms" (Langlois, Abstract). The view point of liberals reflects the national concept of human rights and the control the government plays in maintaining the rights of the citizens. Much of the liberal agenda is based on sharing of wealth instead of capitalism, where wealth is decided by status, class, and the person's strong desire to "capitalize" on whatever project will ensure them greatest prosperity and power. Liberal views support a life in which the government has more control over businesses and protect the worker.
Pluralism
Liberalism and cosmopolitanism are often linked together to describe some sectors of the parties but as a whole they are very different in some views and alike in others. This has created more of a pluralism view in which the social organization tolerates all diversity in groups with the truth being that reality is based on various substances and elements. Pluralists seek peace coexistence based on good faith principles between cultures and the acceptance of diversity. The pluralist actually is more suited to the cosmopolitan than the liberal. Pluralists view power as a way for people who have to control people who are lacking. Pluralists feel everyone has power in one form or another and no one should have more power than anyone else.
Cosmopolitanism and Liberalism
Both Cosmopolitanism and Liberalism seek to protect rights of humans but on different scales. Social liberalism reflects the chosen path...
Social liberals concerned with the fairness to states and societies and cosmopolitan liberals are concerned with individual fairness. Differences in principles regarding domestic and international civil society are decisive motives for political and social philosophers to champion social liberalism.
Conclusion
Cosmopolitanism and Liberalism in power and politics promote the human rights on two different scales but definitely share similar viewpoints on the topic. Liberalism has a definite foothold in the world as being viable whereas cosmopolitanism remains more of a concept than a true political platform. Nussbaum agrees that it may be incapable of generating what it takes in sacrifice and restraint to be accomplished (Paden, Abstract). The two different philosophies though different may have a more plausible chance if the philosophies can be merged to meet the desires of both parties. Liberalism outweighs cosmopolitanism in the way most humans want the world to be governed by social reforms more than human right reforms on a world scale. Nussbaum has been an avid speaker on the concept of cosmopolitanism and call for the need for more education in the United State to the plight of humans in other parts of the world and the need for all countries to unite for the good of the world as a whole. More work must be done if, Cosmopolitanism and Liberalism in power and politics, are going to succeed not only from the United States standpoint but from that of other top nations as well.
Bibliography
Langlois, Anthony. "Human Rights and Cosmopolitan Liberalism." Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy
, Volume 10, Issue 1 March 2007, pages
29-45
Nussbaum, Martha. "For Love of Country: Debating the Limits of Patriotism." Beacon Press
Books 1996
Paden, Roger. "For Love of Country: Debating the Limits of Patriotism." The Review of Metaphysics. Philosophy Education Society, Inc. 1997. HighBeam Research. 6 Apr.
2010 .
Stoddard, Eve Walsh; Grant H. Conrwell. "Peripheral Visions: towards a geoethics of citizenship.(Perspectives)." Liberal Education. Association of American Colleges and Universities. 2003. HighBeam Research. 6 Apr. 2010 .
