Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-7lfxl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-03-30T08:15:50.423Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Kant on the Despotic Danger of a World State

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 October 2024

Bo Fang
Bo Fang*
Affiliation:
Peking University, Beijing, China
*
Email: fangbo@pku.edu.cn
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this article, I argue that Kant’s real reason for rejecting a world state in practice is that a world state would be in greater danger of despotism than individual states. Kant hopes that public participation and self-enlightenment of the people in the public sphere could counter the despotic danger in individual states. However, in a world state, state affairs are too distant from the lives of individuals, making it difficult for individuals to maintain enthusiasm for public discourse and political enlightenment. Moreover, the absence of external competition and the risk of war would eliminate the incentive of the ruler to preserve freedom for the development of industry and commerce and, consequently, for the enlightenment of the people. These defects make it more difficult for a world state to resist despotic danger.

Keywords

Kantdespotismworld stateenlightenmentpublic sphere

Information

Type
Article
Information
Kantian Review , Volume 29 , Issue 3 , September 2024 , pp. 387 - 404
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Kantian Review

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Albrow, Martin, and Glasius, Marlies (2007) ‘Democracy and the possibility of a global public sphere’. Global Civil Society, 8, 1–18.Google Scholar
Bohman, James (1997) ‘The public spheres of the world citizen’. In Bohman, James and Lutz-Bachmann, Mathias (eds), Perpetual Peace: Essays on Kant’s Cosmopolitan Ideal (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press), 179–200.Google Scholar
Bosbach, Franz (2011) ‘Universalmonarchie’. In Friedrich Jaeger (ed.), Enzyklopädie der Neuzeit (Stuttgart: Verlag J. B. Metzler), vol. 13, 1006–1009.Google Scholar
Byrd, B. Sharon and Hruschka, Joachim (2008) ‘From the state of nature to the juridical state of states’. Law and Philosophy, 27, 599–641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byrd, B. Sharon and Hruschka, Joachim (2009) Kant’s Doctrine of Right: A Commentary. NewYork: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Caranti, Luigi (2017) Kant’s Political Legacy: Human Rights, Peace, Progress. Cardiff: University of Wales Press.Google Scholar
Caranti, Luigi (2023) ‘Why does kant think that democracy is necessarily despotic?’ Kantian Review, 28, 167–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cavallar, Georg (2015) Kant’s Embedded Cosmopolitanism: History, Philosophy, and Education for World Citizens. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Tocqueville, Alexis (2003) Democracy in America and Two Essays on America. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Formosa, Paul (2014) ‘The ends of politics: Kant on sovereignty, civil disobedience and cosmopolitanism’. In Formosa, Paul, Goldman, Avery and Patrone, Tatiana (eds), Politics and Teleology in Kant (Cardiff: University of Wales Press), 37–58.Google Scholar
Jürgen, Habermas (1990) Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit. Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp Verlag.Google Scholar
Jürgen, Habermas (1997) ‘Kant’s idea of perpetual peace, with the benefit of two hundred year’s hindsight’. In Bohman, James and Lutz-Bachmann, Mathias (eds), Perpetual Peace: Essays on Kant’s Cosmopolitan Ideal (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press), 113–54.Google Scholar
Höffe, Otfried (2001) “Königliche Völker”: Zu Kants cosmopolitischer Rechts- und Friedenstheorie. Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp Verlag.Google Scholar
Höffe, Otfried (2007) ‘Kants universaler Kosmopolitismus’. Deutsche Zeitschrift für Philosophie, 55, 179–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kersting, Wolfgang (2007) Wohlgeordnete Freiheit: Immanual Kants Rechts- und Staatsphilosophie. Paderborn: Mentis Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kleingeld, Pauline (2003) ‘Kant’s cosmopolitan patriotism’. Kant-Studien, 94, 299–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kleingeld, Pauline (2004) ‘Approaching perpetual peace: Kant’s defence of a league of states and his ideal of a world federation’. European Journal of Philosophy, 12, 304–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kleingeld, Pauline (2012) Kant and Cosmopolitanism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lutz-Bachmann, Mathias (1997) ‘Kant’s idea of peace and the philosophical conception of a world republic’. In Bohman, James and Lutz-Bachmann, Mathias (eds), Perpetual Peace: Essays on Kant’s Cosmopolitan Ideal (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press), 59–78.Google Scholar
Maliks, Reidar (2014) Kant’s Politics in Context. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDonnell, Joshua (2020) ‘Municipality size, political efficacy and political participation: a systematic review’. Local Government Studies, 46, 331–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maus, Ingeborg (2006) ‘From nation-state to global state, or the decline of democracy’. Constellations, 13, 465–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pogge, Thomas (1992) ‘Cosmopolitanism and sovereignty’. Ethics, 103, 48–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pogge, Thomas (2009) ‘Kant’s vision of a just world order’. In Hill, Thomas E. (ed.), The Blackwell Guide to Kant’s Ethics (West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell), 196–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ripstein, Arthur (2021) Kant and the Law of War. NewYork: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, Allen (2014) ‘Kant’s principles of publicity’. In Formosa, Paul, Goldman, Avery, and Patrone, Tatiana (eds), Politics and Teleology in Kant (Cardiff: University of Wales Press), 76–91.Google Scholar