Political Cosmopolitanism
video description
Date: 2025-01-19
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 20
DumiduHandakumbura
I understand the scope of this series is limited to political philosophy, but I'm of the opinion the cynic brought the king to the place where he could say you're blocking the Sun. And that's why even though the UDHR is merely a declaration unless you're absolutely certain the world is empirical (in which case politics is all you need, you shouldn't violate another's rights, regardless of the moral distance, or other ideological differences.
At the least powerful institutions should identify the affected and allow them to move to other countries where socio-economic and legal factors suit them. Because we're all fine with pretending to cater to the beggar, but nobody wants to actually go down there and serve themselves up as a meal. The episode on imprisonment should be interesting.
reply
I understand the scope of this series is limited to political philosophy, but I'm of the opinion the cynic brought the king to the place where he could say you're blocking the Sun. And that's why even though the UDHR is merely a declaration unless you're absolutely certain the world is empirical (in which case politics is all you need, you shouldn't violate another's rights, regardless of the moral distance, or other ideological differences.
At the least powerful institutions should identify the affected and allow them to move to other countries where socio-economic and legal factors suit them. Because we're all fine with pretending to cater to the beggar, but nobody wants to actually go down there and serve themselves up as a meal. The episode on imprisonment should be interesting.
reply
mistermurse
The thought of Robert Goodin is helpful here. He argues that people have special responsibilities to protect those vulnerable to their actions, with responsibility proportional to vulnerability and capacity to help. This applies across natural and social contexts, to both individuals and groups. Goodin’s vulnerability principle provides a foundation for understanding many common moral intuitions and special responsibilities while also offering guidance for institutional design and public policy. Rather than limiting responsibilities to cases of explicit commitment or causal fault, it grounds them in the ongoing relationship between vulnerable people and those who can affect their interests.
reply
The thought of Robert Goodin is helpful here. He argues that people have special responsibilities to protect those vulnerable to their actions, with responsibility proportional to vulnerability and capacity to help. This applies across natural and social contexts, to both individuals and groups. Goodin’s vulnerability principle provides a foundation for understanding many common moral intuitions and special responsibilities while also offering guidance for institutional design and public policy. Rather than limiting responsibilities to cases of explicit commitment or causal fault, it grounds them in the ongoing relationship between vulnerable people and those who can affect their interests.
reply
toddchavez8274
11: 32 it would be chaos unless there is a universal culture developed, or a universal cultural compatibility layer of some kind. Until then, automated trustless systems would need to be in place to protect each other from bad-faith actors / people trying to desperately claw onto some sort of resource or of desperation and/or a zero-sum worldview. The cynicism in much of the third world - and even developing nations like India - merely provides fuel for right wing ultranationalists and makes them right when it comes to defending our system of borders.
reply
11: 32 it would be chaos unless there is a universal culture developed, or a universal cultural compatibility layer of some kind. Until then, automated trustless systems would need to be in place to protect each other from bad-faith actors / people trying to desperately claw onto some sort of resource or of desperation and/or a zero-sum worldview. The cynicism in much of the third world - and even developing nations like India - merely provides fuel for right wing ultranationalists and makes them right when it comes to defending our system of borders.
reply
mrdonetx
It's not a secret organization. It's not an organization at all. It's a group of people whose ultimate goals align. They don't have to actually work together, but if they're all working towards the same goals or their goals are dependent on the goals of others then you're going to have a ridiculous parallel between them. From the outside looking in it looks as if they're working together. But the problem is it doesn't matter if they are or aren't. They're still trying to push to the same goal and those goals are rarely in the interest of 90% of the world.
reply
It's not a secret organization. It's not an organization at all. It's a group of people whose ultimate goals align. They don't have to actually work together, but if they're all working towards the same goals or their goals are dependent on the goals of others then you're going to have a ridiculous parallel between them. From the outside looking in it looks as if they're working together. But the problem is it doesn't matter if they are or aren't. They're still trying to push to the same goal and those goals are rarely in the interest of 90% of the world.
reply
crash_course
9: 08 this is another reason why you need proportional ranked Choice voting as a key component of your common governance framework. Any voting system that is disproportionate will do those negative things. Therefore you must avoid those systems and instead work towards systems that are representative. Additionally you have to have specific provisions that allows such institutions of cultural to be codified in a way that protect the individual liberties without eliminating long-standing institutions that are integral to life
reply
9: 08 this is another reason why you need proportional ranked Choice voting as a key component of your common governance framework. Any voting system that is disproportionate will do those negative things. Therefore you must avoid those systems and instead work towards systems that are representative. Additionally you have to have specific provisions that allows such institutions of cultural to be codified in a way that protect the individual liberties without eliminating long-standing institutions that are integral to life
reply
Caterfree10
Damn, cosmopolitanism really sounds like my ideology: the freedom for everyone to live as themselves in equal worth while still celebrating their differences. It’s nice to have a name for that as someone who struggles to word those. It feels like cosmopolitanism in general is short changed in media depictions as a high class thing when it really isn’t. It is a working class unifier imo.
Tho oh boy, we’re looking at prison abolition next episode How many bets on if we’ll have a comment section then
reply
Damn, cosmopolitanism really sounds like my ideology: the freedom for everyone to live as themselves in equal worth while still celebrating their differences. It’s nice to have a name for that as someone who struggles to word those. It feels like cosmopolitanism in general is short changed in media depictions as a high class thing when it really isn’t. It is a working class unifier imo.
Tho oh boy, we’re looking at prison abolition next episode How many bets on if we’ll have a comment section then
reply
pedrostormrage
11: 12 National borders are inventions. I feel the very division of the world in nations is already enough to generate conflict, because of in-group-out-group biases. My globalization utopia is having only a single nation (with a shared language for the sake of communication, but still allowing other/local languages to exist) in the world. I don't think it's impossible, but in order to be stable it would require major diplomatic efforts everywhere, and it would probably need to happen incrementally.
reply
11: 12 National borders are inventions. I feel the very division of the world in nations is already enough to generate conflict, because of in-group-out-group biases. My globalization utopia is having only a single nation (with a shared language for the sake of communication, but still allowing other/local languages to exist) in the world. I don't think it's impossible, but in order to be stable it would require major diplomatic efforts everywhere, and it would probably need to happen incrementally.
reply
thomasrogers8239
I believe that the only thing we owe each other a chance to show we are good and an opportunity to show we can change for the better. Anything more than that is for good people to disagree on. That disagreement and resolution should be accomplsihed as locally as possible IMHO.
Personally in terms of what we do when others are at risk, is help from a full barn. Fill your barn with your harvest/income, and when your barn is full instead of building a bigger barn fill someone else's barn.
reply
I believe that the only thing we owe each other a chance to show we are good and an opportunity to show we can change for the better. Anything more than that is for good people to disagree on. That disagreement and resolution should be accomplsihed as locally as possible IMHO.
Personally in terms of what we do when others are at risk, is help from a full barn. Fill your barn with your harvest/income, and when your barn is full instead of building a bigger barn fill someone else's barn.
reply
alexkuron5069
My thoughts while watching this:
-Does she know she's Kant posting
-seconds later of course she knows that lol
-Crash course political theory is starting to sound a lot like my senior ethics class
-yea so my politics are basically the song imagine by John Lennon, so you are speaking my language
-why would you save a child drowning next to you, but not one across the world Yea so i feel like I could write a whole essay about that
reply
My thoughts while watching this:
-Does she know she's Kant posting
-seconds later of course she knows that lol
-Crash course political theory is starting to sound a lot like my senior ethics class
-yea so my politics are basically the song imagine by John Lennon, so you are speaking my language
-why would you save a child drowning next to you, but not one across the world Yea so i feel like I could write a whole essay about that
reply
crash_course
7: 42 and this is why you need voting mechanisms that select multiple winners in the proportions of the people who may represent. You need to balance out political pressures so that you always have a wide variety of opinions at the negotiating table in the actual Halls of governance. If you don't have this but instead a disproportionate system you degrade your legitimacy as an organizing entity claiming to be representative of a whole.
reply
7: 42 and this is why you need voting mechanisms that select multiple winners in the proportions of the people who may represent. You need to balance out political pressures so that you always have a wide variety of opinions at the negotiating table in the actual Halls of governance. If you don't have this but instead a disproportionate system you degrade your legitimacy as an organizing entity claiming to be representative of a whole.
reply
shogunn2517
I'm reminded of the Client's speech from the Mandalorian. That the Empire improves everything system it touches in every metric, in terms of safety, prosperity and peace.
But that line was said to someone who's planet the Empire destroyed with a superlaser attached to a mega space station.
The metrics of what one considers peace and progress is not considered universally. Unless of course you are making the rules unilaterally.
reply
I'm reminded of the Client's speech from the Mandalorian. That the Empire improves everything system it touches in every metric, in terms of safety, prosperity and peace.
But that line was said to someone who's planet the Empire destroyed with a superlaser attached to a mega space station.
The metrics of what one considers peace and progress is not considered universally. Unless of course you are making the rules unilaterally.
reply
6565sebas
8: 28 I don't get why she talks about inequality as something negative, poverty is the real problem, not that my neighbor earns more than me. Companies giving jobs in countries with lower income is a win win for everyone: This companies usually offer salaries higher than the average local salary, the people there get a good paid job, they can improve their quality of life, why is that something negative
reply
8: 28 I don't get why she talks about inequality as something negative, poverty is the real problem, not that my neighbor earns more than me. Companies giving jobs in countries with lower income is a win win for everyone: This companies usually offer salaries higher than the average local salary, the people there get a good paid job, they can improve their quality of life, why is that something negative
reply
Josh-ks7co
If someone in power is telling you immigrants are the problem, those people are the problem. At best ignorant on how to wield their power to utilize the resource. I'd take someone who is willing to uproot their life searching for opportunity over some rando neighbor any day. (They commit significantly less crime per capita and housing shortages are caused by people in power not properly zoning density)
reply
If someone in power is telling you immigrants are the problem, those people are the problem. At best ignorant on how to wield their power to utilize the resource. I'd take someone who is willing to uproot their life searching for opportunity over some rando neighbor any day. (They commit significantly less crime per capita and housing shortages are caused by people in power not properly zoning density)
reply
ulysisxtr
This is a very important discussion. Globalism isn't new but the tools to make it more accessible are. We can see in history the effects of it when Japan closed itself, when Mongolia conquered most of the old world, when the new world was discovered and so on. Looking back, what should have been done differently What were the mistakes back then that we are making today
reply
This is a very important discussion. Globalism isn't new but the tools to make it more accessible are. We can see in history the effects of it when Japan closed itself, when Mongolia conquered most of the old world, when the new world was discovered and so on. Looking back, what should have been done differently What were the mistakes back then that we are making today
reply
crash_course
In the Chinese context, Mohism is probably closer to cosmopolitanism than the Confucian tradition. There is a famous dispute between the followers of Mozi who advocated universal obligations to others versus Mencius (possibly the premier follower of Confucius) advocating for the particular and differentiated relationships (such as family, lord, etc)
reply
In the Chinese context, Mohism is probably closer to cosmopolitanism than the Confucian tradition. There is a famous dispute between the followers of Mozi who advocated universal obligations to others versus Mencius (possibly the premier follower of Confucius) advocating for the particular and differentiated relationships (such as family, lord, etc)
reply
TwinTn
0: 34 worth noting that the video starts talking about refugees, but shows a graph concerning immigration. Significantly overlapping subjects for sure, but not the same. Refugees are more a question of legal and ethical obligation, immigration is more tied to economics.
reply
0: 34 worth noting that the video starts talking about refugees, but shows a graph concerning immigration. Significantly overlapping subjects for sure, but not the same. Refugees are more a question of legal and ethical obligation, immigration is more tied to economics.
reply
crash_course
6: 07 and this is why you need a global Parliament actually elected by and accountable to the individuals of the Nations. You do not have this then you cannot have legitimacy in your global body to hold the reins of power.
reply
6: 07 and this is why you need a global Parliament actually elected by and accountable to the individuals of the Nations. You do not have this then you cannot have legitimacy in your global body to hold the reins of power.
reply
JohnDoe-yu3em
Really glad she’s continuing the crash course presentation style of allowing grey areas where we don’t have answers instead of filling in the gaps with personal ideologies. Great work on this series so far!
reply
Really glad she’s continuing the crash course presentation style of allowing grey areas where we don’t have answers instead of filling in the gaps with personal ideologies. Great work on this series so far!
reply
Black_Corey
Hope they do an episode on nationalism, the other side of the coin. To what extent does the right to flee poverty and violence impact the ability of a people to preserve their national culture
reply
Hope they do an episode on nationalism, the other side of the coin. To what extent does the right to flee poverty and violence impact the ability of a people to preserve their national culture
reply
joshuabray306
I've come to adore this series. Before each episode, I have to take a deep breath and prepare myself mentally to have my worldview shaken a little, and that's a sign of its quality.
reply
I've come to adore this series. Before each episode, I have to take a deep breath and prepare myself mentally to have my worldview shaken a little, and that's a sign of its quality.
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
