Rooted Cosmopolitanism

This romantic novel has been studied primarily in terms of the portrait of its female protagonist. Unmentioned by prior scholarly studies is the fact that throughout the novel, Vargas Llosa discreetly yet consistently dates plot developments, allowing the reader to deduce that the female protagonist dies in July 1989, the date of the author's final experience of Europe during the Cold War. Drawing on this structure, the present article argues that the post-1989 historical events and social trends that appear in the text are not authorial chronological errors, but rather represent a deliberate effort on Vargas Llosa's part to subsume the post-1989 world into the ethos of the Cold War years, when, as he argues in La civilización del espectáculo (2012), an essay collection written in part concurrently with Travesuras de la niña mala, books and ideas mattered more than is the case in the 1990s or the twenty-first century. In order to achieve this absorption of the post-Cold-War world by the pre-1989 period, this article maintains, Vargas Llosa depoliticizes the Cold War years, portraying them not in terms of East-West ideological struggle, but rather as an era of the flourishing of literary culture centred in Paris.

In numerous interviews, writings, and lectures, Mario Vargas Llosa has
attributed his disenchantment with socialism, to a large extent, to the visit he made to the Soviet Union in 1968. This article attempts to reconstruct Vargas Llosa’s short visit to Moscow and contextualize both the impressions he wrote immediately after his visit and those he expressed many years later.

Previous research has provided compelling accounts of how the alter-globalization movement develops alternative visions of globalization that are firmly rooted in local struggles and place-based politics, celebrating cultural distinctions and local idiosyncrasies, while at the same time embracing global movement building and placebased globalism and expressing both local and cosmopolitan identities and values. Given these findings of previous research, how do alter-globalization movement participants think about place identity, place meaning, and place attachment? What is their sense of place? We explore these questions in the context of the Slow Food movement, a global network that brings together many locally-oriented activists to transform the food system. Our semi-structured interviews with Slow Food movement participants provide evidence and examples that are indicative of the presence of place-based politics and place-based globalism in the Slow Food movement. This research contributes to the literature in two ways: It synthesizes and applies place-based concepts to the study of highly diverse transnational movement spaces to generate a deeper understanding of transnational social movement participants' sense of place and of the solidarities and shared identities that they develop, and it highlights the voices and personal stories transnational food movement participants shared during interviews as they reflected on issues of place.

Cosmopolitanism in Decline:
The decline of arrogant cosmopolitanism after 100 years of activist social science!
A View from the Margins.
Tentative outline
Peter Emanuel Franks
© March 2025
• Globalization: Zero de Conduit
• The dangers of the Grand Plans/ Pie in the sky
• So let it be written so let it be done” said the Pharoah. Elites rushing things at the speed of thought rather than at the slow speed of real sensuous activity, which is required
• Infantile social engineering and it’s ‘unintended’ but/yet foreseeable consequences. Expanding into misguided regime change on an unimaginable scale with dire consequences for the entire world order.
• Information war on a global scale and within nation states and whatever grasping spheres of influence. Its propaganda by immersion through the cell phones.
The arrogance of the cosmopolitan and their consequent ignorance and disrespect of the ‘others’, the backward and the ‘deplorables’. The Rockefeller-Spelman foundation and the stimulation of the social sciences cheerled by Margaret Mead and others. The integrating system of values with the ‘coming of age of social science’ or what Mead describes as, “… the lost innocence of World WAR II, that truth can harm.” Thus she arrives at the following after serious discussions among the members of the Society for Applied Anthropology held in 1949.: Margaret Mead (1950) in her reflection of the decade 1939 – 1949  makes it quite plain that the social sciences have to manipulate the people for their own good. When discussing what anthropologists and social scientists in general, can contribute she wrote:
“Implement plans for altering our present culture, by recognising the importance of including the social scientist within his experimental material, and by recognizing that by working toward defined ends we commit ourselves to the manipulation of persons, and therefore to the negation of democracy. Only by working in terms of values which are limited to defining a direction, is it possible for us to use scientific methods in the control of the process without the negation of the moral autonomy of the human spirit”
But, this is not the only misdirection in the social sciences.
Clearly shades of the woke culture of today. A dead end or a new beginning?
• Disrespect for particularities and the imposition of the numerical democratic model.
• Premature totalization following the followers of Kant, though not Kant himself!
• Marx the cosmopolitan: Moses Hess’ rejection of Marx’s cosmopolitan internationalism, and idea of the “Universal Man” and who proposed that, “Internationalism should unite, not abolish, nations” 
• Hess’ argument is echoed somewhat in McDougal’s later important distinction between “cosmopolitan internationalism” and “national internationalism”.
• The rejection of particularities and their histories and cultures is an essential component of the beginning of social science where so called ]scientific] decisions are made by so-called ‘consensus’. That is politically, resulting in premature totalization of reality and its possibilities with the reduction of political, ethical, cultural and religious complexity to simplistic technical solutions.
• General, The Right Honourable Jan Christian Smuts’ Holism and Evolution as the birth of cosmopolitanism through Holism – “an ontological as well as a cosmological imminent Principle - the Ultimate Reality.” (p. 87-88)  Cf Hitlers understanding of history in guiding the Volk. We all have our ‘geists’
• McDougal versus the social anthropologists after Boas: Mead and others
• Boas, it is important to remember the origins and founder statements on Anthropology as represented by Frans Boas in the 1920’s, which capture this clear acceptance of this dominative social engineering attitude to others be they African, Jewish or whatever. This perspective is clearly expressed in Boas’ oft repeated paragraph from the conclusion of, “The Problems of the American Negro in America”, Yale Quarterly Review, p. 383, January 1921, and in concluding the chapter on, “The Negro in America”, in Race and Democratic Society ,1945 p. 81, as well as elsewhere):
“Thus, it would seem that man being what he is, the Negro problem will not disappear in America until the Negro blood has been so much diluted that it will no longer be recognised just as antisemitism will not disappear until the last vestige of the Jew as a Jew has disappeared”.
Boas’ assimilationist solution, which denies cultural differences, as well as the histories of particularities and their people, in fact suggests their demise, in favour of the secular universals of the West. Is this not a call for genocide?
• Nature/Nurture and the ideological victory of equity but smuggling genetics in through the back door
• The Liberal Consensus (Actually a convention)  Cancelling, McDougal, Eysenck, Carleton Coon etc. The first cancelling, Note: there is renewed effort to cancel McDougall for his eugenicist views by the APA.
• The Dominating Dialogue focussing the two sided message to the opinion leaders (cf two stage communications Katz)
• Censorship and filtering of science through the so-called liberal consensus, whereby scientific conflicts were resolved through ‘consensus’, locking in the premature totalization and the illusions of liberal cosmopolitanism, and laying the ground for other views to be defined as misinformation of whatever sort, and even racist, In the case of the race dialogue. However, reality does not disappear through such a sleight of hand (Umcentrieurung)
• “Umcentrieurung” and the illusion of democracy
• The Gestalt Psychology of Kurt Lewin and the illusion of . One could say there is nothing as good as a good theory / narrative.
• The fetishization of participation,
• Inclusion as an alibi for disrespect.
• Identity politics and the fetishization of individual difference (LGBTQ etc) (My friends transcultural miracle and Angela Davis’ surprise. Anything is possible
• The Strengthening of particularities
• The Boer War and the demise of British impunity, The first Afrikaans se “liberation” movement
• The liberation movements and self-determination usually lost in the grab for power and greed in the emerging nations
• Re-emergence of old Nationalisms in Europe
• Rise of Russia, China and India as well as other Asian, African and South American  countries what is commonly referred to as the Global South.
• Rise of indigenous power and voices (undoing the liberal standards of separate is by definition unequal, i.e., calls in Bolivia for separate and equal, multiple nationalities etc)
• The reemergence of a will to self determination among the particularities of all shapes and sizes.
• From indigeneity to spirit murder.

• Recognition of the pluriverse.
• Collapse of the dominating dialogue between Democracy and Communism
• Collapse of the liberal ideology with (paired to) the demise of Apartheid.
• Appearance of the multi polar world with the collapse of the Soviet Union, although the view that the world was uni-polar was held asway until around the outbreak of the Ukraine war
• Emergence of BRICS and other Asian international collectives which can challenge Western hegemony.
• Emergence of a competing approach to democracy What China calls “whole process democracy”?  Versus numerical democracy touted yet not practiced by the USA.
• The imminent decline of the cosmopolitan universe.
• Increasingly desperate religious fervour among the cosmopolitan elites, crisis politics (energy, covid, environment, food, mass migration, terrorism etc) crisis = terror
• The international monetary reset in progress
• Rise of alternative blocs and a myriad of particularities with their own voices, values and intentions.
• The failures of cosmopolitanism
• It is dangerous to do science by convention. It leads to premature totalization, censoring and cancelling viable alternatives. It comes back to haunt the enterprise of science. It requires open, thorough and critical dialogue and discussion can take place unhindered by ideological and political interests. (cf. societal psychology)
• The ideological failure of the cosmopolitan gaze. Too much certainty and mythologising
• The emerging conflict:
• International Cosmopolitan universalisms  versus particularites and pluriversalism towards multipolarity within and between countries guiding their own developmental objectives in a complimentary world where self determination and cooperation can evolve, without the domination of any hegemonic power(s).
• Hegemonic universals with their individuals versus the sovereignty of semiospheres and their persons (people has the double meaning of persons and a particular ontology i.e., a particularity. As defined by themselves.)

Cosmopolitanism in Decline:
The decline of arrogant cosmopolitanism after 100 years of activist social science!
A View from the Margins.
Tentative outline
Peter Emanuel Franks
© March 2025
• Globalization: Zero de Conduit
• The dangers of the Grand Plans/ Pie in the sky
• So let it be written so let it be done” said the Pharoah. Elites rushing things at the speed of thought rather than at the slow speed of real sensuous activity, which is required
• Infantile social engineering and it’s ‘unintended’ but/yet foreseeable consequences. Expanding into misguided regime change on an unimaginable scale with dire consequences for the entire world order.
• Information war on a global scale and within nation states and whatever grasping spheres of influence. Its propaganda by immersion through the cell phones.
The arrogance of the cosmopolitan and their consequent ignorance and disrespect of the ‘others’, the backward and the ‘deplorables’. The Rockefeller-Spelman foundation and the stimulation of the social sciences cheerled by Margaret Mead and others. The integrating system of values with the ‘coming of age of social science’ or what Mead describes as, “… the lost innocence of World WAR II, that truth can harm.” Thus she arrives at the following after serious discussions among the members of the Society for Applied Anthropology held in 1949.: Margaret Mead (1950) in her reflection of the decade 1939 – 1949  makes it quite plain that the social sciences have to manipulate the people for their own good. When discussing what anthropologists and social scientists in general, can contribute she wrote:
“Implement plans for altering our present culture, by recognising the importance of including the social scientist within his experimental material, and by recognizing that by working toward defined ends we commit ourselves to the manipulation of persons, and therefore to the negation of democracy. Only by working in terms of values which are limited to defining a direction, is it possible for us to use scientific methods in the control of the process without the negation of the moral autonomy of the human spirit”
But, this is not the only misdirection in the social sciences.
Clearly shades of the woke culture of today. A dead end or a new beginning?
• Disrespect for particularities and the imposition of the numerical democratic model.
• Premature totalization following the followers of Kant, though not Kant himself!
• Marx the cosmopolitan: Moses Hess’ rejection of Marx’s cosmopolitan internationalism, and idea of the “Universal Man” and who proposed that, “Internationalism should unite, not abolish, nations” 
• Hess’ argument is echoed somewhat in McDougal’s later important distinction between “cosmopolitan internationalism” and “national internationalism”.
• The rejection of particularities and their histories and cultures is an essential component of the beginning of social science where so called ]scientific] decisions are made by so-called ‘consensus’. That is politically, resulting in premature totalization of reality and its possibilities with the reduction of political, ethical, cultural and religious complexity to simplistic technical solutions.
• General, The Right Honourable Jan Christian Smuts’ Holism and Evolution as the birth of cosmopolitanism through Holism – “an ontological as well as a cosmological imminent Principle - the Ultimate Reality.” (p. 87-88)  Cf Hitlers understanding of history in guiding the Volk. We all have our ‘geists’
• McDougal versus the social anthropologists after Boas: Mead and others
• Boas, it is important to remember the origins and founder statements on Anthropology as represented by Frans Boas in the 1920’s, which capture this clear acceptance of this dominative social engineering attitude to others be they African, Jewish or whatever. This perspective is clearly expressed in Boas’ oft repeated paragraph from the conclusion of, “The Problems of the American Negro in America”, Yale Quarterly Review, p. 383, January 1921, and in concluding the chapter on, “The Negro in America”, in Race and Democratic Society ,1945 p. 81, as well as elsewhere):
“Thus, it would seem that man being what he is, the Negro problem will not disappear in America until the Negro blood has been so much diluted that it will no longer be recognised just as antisemitism will not disappear until the last vestige of the Jew as a Jew has disappeared”.
Boas’ assimilationist solution, which denies cultural differences, as well as the histories of particularities and their people, in fact suggests their demise, in favour of the secular universals of the West. Is this not a call for genocide?
• Nature/Nurture and the ideological victory of equity but smuggling genetics in through the back door
• The Liberal Consensus (Actually a convention)  Cancelling, McDougal, Eysenck, Carleton Coon etc. The first cancelling, Note: there is renewed effort to cancel McDougall for his eugenicist views by the APA.
• The Dominating Dialogue focussing the two sided message to the opinion leaders (cf two stage communications Katz)
• Censorship and filtering of science through the so-called liberal consensus, whereby scientific conflicts were resolved through ‘consensus’, locking in the premature totalization and the illusions of liberal cosmopolitanism, and laying the ground for other views to be defined as misinformation of whatever sort, and even racist, In the case of the race dialogue. However, reality does not disappear through such a sleight of hand (Umcentrieurung)
• “Umcentrieurung” and the illusion of democracy
• The Gestalt Psychology of Kurt Lewin and the illusion of . One could say there is nothing as good as a good theory / narrative.
• The fetishization of participation,
• Inclusion as an alibi for disrespect.
• Identity politics and the fetishization of individual difference (LGBTQ etc) (My friends transcultural miracle and Angela Davis’ surprise. Anything is possible
• The Strengthening of particularities
• The Boer War and the demise of British impunity, The first Afrikaans se “liberation” movement
• The liberation movements and self-determination usually lost in the grab for power and greed in the emerging nations
• Re-emergence of old Nationalisms in Europe
• Rise of Russia, China and India as well as other Asian, African and South American  countries what is commonly referred to as the Global South.
• Rise of indigenous power and voices (undoing the liberal standards of separate is by definition unequal, i.e., calls in Bolivia for separate and equal, multiple nationalities etc)
• The reemergence of a will to self determination among the particularities of all shapes and sizes.
• From indigeneity to spirit murder.

• Recognition of the pluriverse.
• Collapse of the dominating dialogue between Democracy and Communism
• Collapse of the liberal ideology with (paired to) the demise of Apartheid.
• Appearance of the multi polar world with the collapse of the Soviet Union, although the view that the world was uni-polar was held asway until around the outbreak of the Ukraine war
• Emergence of BRICS and other Asian international collectives which can challenge Western hegemony.
• Emergence of a competing approach to democracy What China calls “whole process democracy”?  Versus numerical democracy touted yet not practiced by the USA.
• The imminent decline of the cosmopolitan universe.
• Increasingly desperate religious fervour among the cosmopolitan elites, crisis politics (energy, covid, environment, food, mass migration, terrorism etc) crisis = terror
• The international monetary reset in progress
• Rise of alternative blocs and a myriad of particularities with their own voices, values and intentions.
• The failures of cosmopolitanism
• It is dangerous to do science by convention. It leads to premature totalization, censoring and cancelling viable alternatives. It comes back to haunt the enterprise of science. It requires open, thorough and critical dialogue and discussion can take place unhindered by ideological and political interests. (cf. societal psychology)
• The ideological failure of the cosmopolitan gaze. Too much certainty and mythologising
• The emerging conflict:
• International Cosmopolitan universalisms  versus particularites and pluriversalism towards multipolarity within and between countries guiding their own developmental objectives in a complimentary world where self determination and cooperation can evolve, without the domination of any hegemonic power(s).
• Hegemonic universals with their individuals versus the sovereignty of semiospheres and their persons (people has the double meaning of persons and a particular ontology i.e., a particularity. As defined by themselves.)

Cosmopolitanism in Decline:
The decline of arrogant cosmopolitanism after 100 years of activist social science!
A View from the Margins.
Tentative outline
Peter Emanuel Franks
© March 2025
• Globalization: Zero de Conduit
• The dangers of the Grand Plans/ Pie in the sky
• So let it be written so let it be done” said the Pharoah. Elites rushing things at the speed of thought rather than at the slow speed of real sensuous activity, which is required
• Infantile social engineering and it’s ‘unintended’ but/yet foreseeable consequences. Expanding into misguided regime change on an unimaginable scale with dire consequences for the entire world order.
• Information war on a global scale and within nation states and whatever grasping spheres of influence. Its propaganda by immersion through the cell phones.
The arrogance of the cosmopolitan and their consequent ignorance and disrespect of the ‘others’, the backward and the ‘deplorables’. The Rockefeller-Spelman foundation and the stimulation of the social sciences cheerled by Margaret Mead and others. The integrating system of values with the ‘coming of age of social science’ or what Mead describes as, “… the lost innocence of World WAR II, that truth can harm.” Thus she arrives at the following after serious discussions among the members of the Society for Applied Anthropology held in 1949.: Margaret Mead (1950) in her reflection of the decade 1939 – 1949  makes it quite plain that the social sciences have to manipulate the people for their own good. When discussing what anthropologists and social scientists in general, can contribute she wrote:
“Implement plans for altering our present culture, by recognising the importance of including the social scientist within his experimental material, and by recognizing that by working toward defined ends we commit ourselves to the manipulation of persons, and therefore to the negation of democracy. Only by working in terms of values which are limited to defining a direction, is it possible for us to use scientific methods in the control of the process without the negation of the moral autonomy of the human spirit”
But, this is not the only misdirection in the social sciences.
Clearly shades of the woke culture of today. A dead end or a new beginning?
• Disrespect for particularities and the imposition of the numerical democratic model.
• Premature totalization following the followers of Kant, though not Kant himself!
• Marx the cosmopolitan: Moses Hess’ rejection of Marx’s cosmopolitan internationalism, and idea of the “Universal Man” and who proposed that, “Internationalism should unite, not abolish, nations” 
• Hess’ argument is echoed somewhat in McDougal’s later important distinction between “cosmopolitan internationalism” and “national internationalism”.
• The rejection of particularities and their histories and cultures is an essential component of the beginning of social science where so called ]scientific] decisions are made by so-called ‘consensus’. That is politically, resulting in premature totalization of reality and its possibilities with the reduction of political, ethical, cultural and religious complexity to simplistic technical solutions.
• General, The Right Honourable Jan Christian Smuts’ Holism and Evolution as the birth of cosmopolitanism through Holism – “an ontological as well as a cosmological imminent Principle - the Ultimate Reality.” (p. 87-88)  Cf Hitlers understanding of history in guiding the Volk. We all have our ‘geists’
• McDougal versus the social anthropologists after Boas: Mead and others
• Boas, it is important to remember the origins and founder statements on Anthropology as represented by Frans Boas in the 1920’s, which capture this clear acceptance of this dominative social engineering attitude to others be they African, Jewish or whatever. This perspective is clearly expressed in Boas’ oft repeated paragraph from the conclusion of, “The Problems of the American Negro in America”, Yale Quarterly Review, p. 383, January 1921, and in concluding the chapter on, “The Negro in America”, in Race and Democratic Society ,1945 p. 81, as well as elsewhere):
“Thus, it would seem that man being what he is, the Negro problem will not disappear in America until the Negro blood has been so much diluted that it will no longer be recognised just as antisemitism will not disappear until the last vestige of the Jew as a Jew has disappeared”.
Boas’ assimilationist solution, which denies cultural differences, as well as the histories of particularities and their people, in fact suggests their demise, in favour of the secular universals of the West. Is this not a call for genocide?
• Nature/Nurture and the ideological victory of equity but smuggling genetics in through the back door
• The Liberal Consensus (Actually a convention)  Cancelling, McDougal, Eysenck, Carleton Coon etc. The first cancelling, Note: there is renewed effort to cancel McDougall for his eugenicist views by the APA.
• The Dominating Dialogue focussing the two sided message to the opinion leaders (cf two stage communications Katz)
• Censorship and filtering of science through the so-called liberal consensus, whereby scientific conflicts were resolved through ‘consensus’, locking in the premature totalization and the illusions of liberal cosmopolitanism, and laying the ground for other views to be defined as misinformation of whatever sort, and even racist, In the case of the race dialogue. However, reality does not disappear through such a sleight of hand (Umcentrieurung)
• “Umcentrieurung” and the illusion of democracy
• The Gestalt Psychology of Kurt Lewin and the illusion of . One could say there is nothing as good as a good theory / narrative.
• The fetishization of participation,
• Inclusion as an alibi for disrespect.
• Identity politics and the fetishization of individual difference (LGBTQ etc) (My friends transcultural miracle and Angela Davis’ surprise. Anything is possible
• The Strengthening of particularities
• The Boer War and the demise of British impunity, The first Afrikaans se “liberation” movement
• The liberation movements and self-determination usually lost in the grab for power and greed in the emerging nations
• Re-emergence of old Nationalisms in Europe
• Rise of Russia, China and India as well as other Asian, African and South American  countries what is commonly referred to as the Global South.
• Rise of indigenous power and voices (undoing the liberal standards of separate is by definition unequal, i.e., calls in Bolivia for separate and equal, multiple nationalities etc)
• The reemergence of a will to self determination among the particularities of all shapes and sizes.
• From indigeneity to spirit murder.

• Recognition of the pluriverse.
• Collapse of the dominating dialogue between Democracy and Communism
• Collapse of the liberal ideology with (paired to) the demise of Apartheid.
• Appearance of the multi polar world with the collapse of the Soviet Union, although the view that the world was uni-polar was held asway until around the outbreak of the Ukraine war
• Emergence of BRICS and other Asian international collectives which can challenge Western hegemony.
• Emergence of a competing approach to democracy What China calls “whole process democracy”?  Versus numerical democracy touted yet not practiced by the USA.
• The imminent decline of the cosmopolitan universe.
• Increasingly desperate religious fervour among the cosmopolitan elites, crisis politics (energy, covid, environment, food, mass migration, terrorism etc) crisis = terror
• The international monetary reset in progress
• Rise of alternative blocs and a myriad of particularities with their own voices, values and intentions.
• The failures of cosmopolitanism
• It is dangerous to do science by convention. It leads to premature totalization, censoring and cancelling viable alternatives. It comes back to haunt the enterprise of science. It requires open, thorough and critical dialogue and discussion can take place unhindered by ideological and political interests. (cf. societal psychology)
• The ideological failure of the cosmopolitan gaze. Too much certainty and mythologising
• The emerging conflict:
• International Cosmopolitan universalisms  versus particularites and pluriversalism towards multipolarity within and between countries guiding their own developmental objectives in a complimentary world where self determination and cooperation can evolve, without the domination of any hegemonic power(s).
• Hegemonic universals with their individuals versus the sovereignty of semiospheres and their persons (people has the double meaning of persons and a particular ontology i.e., a particularity. As defined by themselves.)

Cosmopolitanism in Decline:
The decline of arrogant cosmopolitanism after 100 years of activist social science!
A View from the Margins.
Tentative outline
Peter Emanuel Franks
© March 2025
• Globalization: Zero de Conduit
• The dangers of the Grand Plans/ Pie in the sky
• So let it be written so let it be done” said the Pharoah. Elites rushing things at the speed of thought rather than at the slow speed of real sensuous activity, which is required
• Infantile social engineering and it’s ‘unintended’ but/yet foreseeable consequences. Expanding into misguided regime change on an unimaginable scale with dire consequences for the entire world order.
• Information war on a global scale and within nation states and whatever grasping spheres of influence. Its propaganda by immersion through the cell phones.
The arrogance of the cosmopolitan and their consequent ignorance and disrespect of the ‘others’, the backward and the ‘deplorables’. The Rockefeller-Spelman foundation and the stimulation of the social sciences cheerled by Margaret Mead and others. The integrating system of values with the ‘coming of age of social science’ or what Mead describes as, “… the lost innocence of World WAR II, that truth can harm.” Thus she arrives at the following after serious discussions among the members of the Society for Applied Anthropology held in 1949.: Margaret Mead (1950) in her reflection of the decade 1939 – 1949  makes it quite plain that the social sciences have to manipulate the people for their own good. When discussing what anthropologists and social scientists in general, can contribute she wrote:
“Implement plans for altering our present culture, by recognising the importance of including the social scientist within his experimental material, and by recognizing that by working toward defined ends we commit ourselves to the manipulation of persons, and therefore to the negation of democracy. Only by working in terms of values which are limited to defining a direction, is it possible for us to use scientific methods in the control of the process without the negation of the moral autonomy of the human spirit”
But, this is not the only misdirection in the social sciences.
Clearly shades of the woke culture of today. A dead end or a new beginning?
• Disrespect for particularities and the imposition of the numerical democratic model.
• Premature totalization following the followers of Kant, though not Kant himself!
• Marx the cosmopolitan: Moses Hess’ rejection of Marx’s cosmopolitan internationalism, and idea of the “Universal Man” and who proposed that, “Internationalism should unite, not abolish, nations” 
• Hess’ argument is echoed somewhat in McDougal’s later important distinction between “cosmopolitan internationalism” and “national internationalism”.
• The rejection of particularities and their histories and cultures is an essential component of the beginning of social science where so called ]scientific] decisions are made by so-called ‘consensus’. That is politically, resulting in premature totalization of reality and its possibilities with the reduction of political, ethical, cultural and religious complexity to simplistic technical solutions.
• General, The Right Honourable Jan Christian Smuts’ Holism and Evolution as the birth of cosmopolitanism through Holism – “an ontological as well as a cosmological imminent Principle - the Ultimate Reality.” (p. 87-88)  Cf Hitlers understanding of history in guiding the Volk. We all have our ‘geists’
• McDougal versus the social anthropologists after Boas: Mead and others
• Boas, it is important to remember the origins and founder statements on Anthropology as represented by Frans Boas in the 1920’s, which capture this clear acceptance of this dominative social engineering attitude to others be they African, Jewish or whatever. This perspective is clearly expressed in Boas’ oft repeated paragraph from the conclusion of, “The Problems of the American Negro in America”, Yale Quarterly Review, p. 383, January 1921, and in concluding the chapter on, “The Negro in America”, in Race and Democratic Society ,1945 p. 81, as well as elsewhere):
“Thus, it would seem that man being what he is, the Negro problem will not disappear in America until the Negro blood has been so much diluted that it will no longer be recognised just as antisemitism will not disappear until the last vestige of the Jew as a Jew has disappeared”.
Boas’ assimilationist solution, which denies cultural differences, as well as the histories of particularities and their people, in fact suggests their demise, in favour of the secular universals of the West. Is this not a call for genocide?
• Nature/Nurture and the ideological victory of equity but smuggling genetics in through the back door
• The Liberal Consensus (Actually a convention)  Cancelling, McDougal, Eysenck, Carleton Coon etc. The first cancelling, Note: there is renewed effort to cancel McDougall for his eugenicist views by the APA.
• The Dominating Dialogue focussing the two sided message to the opinion leaders (cf two stage communications Katz)
• Censorship and filtering of science through the so-called liberal consensus, whereby scientific conflicts were resolved through ‘consensus’, locking in the premature totalization and the illusions of liberal cosmopolitanism, and laying the ground for other views to be defined as misinformation of whatever sort, and even racist, In the case of the race dialogue. However, reality does not disappear through such a sleight of hand (Umcentrieurung)
• “Umcentrieurung” and the illusion of democracy
• The Gestalt Psychology of Kurt Lewin and the illusion of . One could say there is nothing as good as a good theory / narrative.
• The fetishization of participation,
• Inclusion as an alibi for disrespect.
• Identity politics and the fetishization of individual difference (LGBTQ etc) (My friends transcultural miracle and Angela Davis’ surprise. Anything is possible
• The Strengthening of particularities
• The Boer War and the demise of British impunity, The first Afrikaans se “liberation” movement
• The liberation movements and self-determination usually lost in the grab for power and greed in the emerging nations
• Re-emergence of old Nationalisms in Europe
• Rise of Russia, China and India as well as other Asian, African and South American  countries what is commonly referred to as the Global South.
• Rise of indigenous power and voices (undoing the liberal standards of separate is by definition unequal, i.e., calls in Bolivia for separate and equal, multiple nationalities etc)
• The reemergence of a will to self determination among the particularities of all shapes and sizes.
• From indigeneity to spirit murder.

• Recognition of the pluriverse.
• Collapse of the dominating dialogue between Democracy and Communism
• Collapse of the liberal ideology with (paired to) the demise of Apartheid.
• Appearance of the multi polar world with the collapse of the Soviet Union, although the view that the world was uni-polar was held asway until around the outbreak of the Ukraine war
• Emergence of BRICS and other Asian international collectives which can challenge Western hegemony.
• Emergence of a competing approach to democracy What China calls “whole process democracy”?  Versus numerical democracy touted yet not practiced by the USA.
• The imminent decline of the cosmopolitan universe.
• Increasingly desperate religious fervour among the cosmopolitan elites, crisis politics (energy, covid, environment, food, mass migration, terrorism etc) crisis = terror
• The international monetary reset in progress
• Rise of alternative blocs and a myriad of particularities with their own voices, values and intentions.
• The failures of cosmopolitanism
• It is dangerous to do science by convention. It leads to premature totalization, censoring and cancelling viable alternatives. It comes back to haunt the enterprise of science. It requires open, thorough and critical dialogue and discussion can take place unhindered by ideological and political interests. (cf. societal psychology)
• The ideological failure of the cosmopolitan gaze. Too much certainty and mythologising
• The emerging conflict:
• International Cosmopolitan universalisms  versus particularites and pluriversalism towards multipolarity within and between countries guiding their own developmental objectives in a complimentary world where self determination and cooperation can evolve, without the domination of any hegemonic power(s).
• Hegemonic universals with their individuals versus the sovereignty of semiospheres and their persons (people has the double meaning of persons and a particular ontology i.e., a particularity. As defined by themselves.)

Cosmopolitanism in Decline:
The decline of arrogant cosmopolitanism after 100 years of activist social science!
A View from the Margins.
Tentative outline
Peter Emanuel Franks
© March 2025
• Globalization: Zero de Conduit
• The dangers of the Grand Plans/ Pie in the sky
• So let it be written so let it be done” said the Pharoah. Elites rushing things at the speed of thought rather than at the slow speed of real sensuous activity, which is required
• Infantile social engineering and it’s ‘unintended’ but/yet foreseeable consequences. Expanding into misguided regime change on an unimaginable scale with dire consequences for the entire world order.
• Information war on a global scale and within nation states and whatever grasping spheres of influence. Its propaganda by immersion through the cell phones.
The arrogance of the cosmopolitan and their consequent ignorance and disrespect of the ‘others’, the backward and the ‘deplorables’. The Rockefeller-Spelman foundation and the stimulation of the social sciences cheerled by Margaret Mead and others. The integrating system of values with the ‘coming of age of social science’ or what Mead describes as, “… the lost innocence of World WAR II, that truth can harm.” Thus she arrives at the following after serious discussions among the members of the Society for Applied Anthropology held in 1949.: Margaret Mead (1950) in her reflection of the decade 1939 – 1949  makes it quite plain that the social sciences have to manipulate the people for their own good. When discussing what anthropologists and social scientists in general, can contribute she wrote:
“Implement plans for altering our present culture, by recognising the importance of including the social scientist within his experimental material, and by recognizing that by working toward defined ends we commit ourselves to the manipulation of persons, and therefore to the negation of democracy. Only by working in terms of values which are limited to defining a direction, is it possible for us to use scientific methods in the control of the process without the negation of the moral autonomy of the human spirit”
But, this is not the only misdirection in the social sciences.
Clearly shades of the woke culture of today. A dead end or a new beginning?
• Disrespect for particularities and the imposition of the numerical democratic model.
• Premature totalization following the followers of Kant, though not Kant himself!
• Marx the cosmopolitan: Moses Hess’ rejection of Marx’s cosmopolitan internationalism, and idea of the “Universal Man” and who proposed that, “Internationalism should unite, not abolish, nations” 
• Hess’ argument is echoed somewhat in McDougal’s later important distinction between “cosmopolitan internationalism” and “national internationalism”.
• The rejection of particularities and their histories and cultures is an essential component of the beginning of social science where so called ]scientific] decisions are made by so-called ‘consensus’. That is politically, resulting in premature totalization of reality and its possibilities with the reduction of political, ethical, cultural and religious complexity to simplistic technical solutions.
• General, The Right Honourable Jan Christian Smuts’ Holism and Evolution as the birth of cosmopolitanism through Holism – “an ontological as well as a cosmological imminent Principle - the Ultimate Reality.” (p. 87-88)  Cf Hitlers understanding of history in guiding the Volk. We all have our ‘geists’
• McDougal versus the social anthropologists after Boas: Mead and others
• Boas, it is important to remember the origins and founder statements on Anthropology as represented by Frans Boas in the 1920’s, which capture this clear acceptance of this dominative social engineering attitude to others be they African, Jewish or whatever. This perspective is clearly expressed in Boas’ oft repeated paragraph from the conclusion of, “The Problems of the American Negro in America”, Yale Quarterly Review, p. 383, January 1921, and in concluding the chapter on, “The Negro in America”, in Race and Democratic Society ,1945 p. 81, as well as elsewhere):
“Thus, it would seem that man being what he is, the Negro problem will not disappear in America until the Negro blood has been so much diluted that it will no longer be recognised just as antisemitism will not disappear until the last vestige of the Jew as a Jew has disappeared”.
Boas’ assimilationist solution, which denies cultural differences, as well as the histories of particularities and their people, in fact suggests their demise, in favour of the secular universals of the West. Is this not a call for genocide?
• Nature/Nurture and the ideological victory of equity but smuggling genetics in through the back door
• The Liberal Consensus (Actually a convention)  Cancelling, McDougal, Eysenck, Carleton Coon etc. The first cancelling, Note: there is renewed effort to cancel McDougall for his eugenicist views by the APA.
• The Dominating Dialogue focussing the two sided message to the opinion leaders (cf two stage communications Katz)
• Censorship and filtering of science through the so-called liberal consensus, whereby scientific conflicts were resolved through ‘consensus’, locking in the premature totalization and the illusions of liberal cosmopolitanism, and laying the ground for other views to be defined as misinformation of whatever sort, and even racist, In the case of the race dialogue. However, reality does not disappear through such a sleight of hand (Umcentrieurung)
• “Umcentrieurung” and the illusion of democracy
• The Gestalt Psychology of Kurt Lewin and the illusion of . One could say there is nothing as good as a good theory / narrative.
• The fetishization of participation,
• Inclusion as an alibi for disrespect.
• Identity politics and the fetishization of individual difference (LGBTQ etc) (My friends transcultural miracle and Angela Davis’ surprise. Anything is possible
• The Strengthening of particularities
• The Boer War and the demise of British impunity, The first Afrikaans se “liberation” movement
• The liberation movements and self-determination usually lost in the grab for power and greed in the emerging nations
• Re-emergence of old Nationalisms in Europe
• Rise of Russia, China and India as well as other Asian, African and South American  countries what is commonly referred to as the Global South.
• Rise of indigenous power and voices (undoing the liberal standards of separate is by definition unequal, i.e., calls in Bolivia for separate and equal, multiple nationalities etc)
• The reemergence of a will to self determination among the particularities of all shapes and sizes.
• From indigeneity to spirit murder.

• Recognition of the pluriverse.
• Collapse of the dominating dialogue between Democracy and Communism
• Collapse of the liberal ideology with (paired to) the demise of Apartheid.
• Appearance of the multi polar world with the collapse of the Soviet Union, although the view that the world was uni-polar was held asway until around the outbreak of the Ukraine war
• Emergence of BRICS and other Asian international collectives which can challenge Western hegemony.
• Emergence of a competing approach to democracy What China calls “whole process democracy”?  Versus numerical democracy touted yet not practiced by the USA.
• The imminent decline of the cosmopolitan universe.
• Increasingly desperate religious fervour among the cosmopolitan elites, crisis politics (energy, covid, environment, food, mass migration, terrorism etc) crisis = terror
• The international monetary reset in progress
• Rise of alternative blocs and a myriad of particularities with their own voices, values and intentions.
• The failures of cosmopolitanism
• It is dangerous to do science by convention. It leads to premature totalization, censoring and cancelling viable alternatives. It comes back to haunt the enterprise of science. It requires open, thorough and critical dialogue and discussion can take place unhindered by ideological and political interests. (cf. societal psychology)
• The ideological failure of the cosmopolitan gaze. Too much certainty and mythologising
• The emerging conflict:
• International Cosmopolitan universalisms  versus particularites and pluriversalism towards multipolarity within and between countries guiding their own developmental objectives in a complimentary world where self determination and cooperation can evolve, without the domination of any hegemonic power(s).
• Hegemonic universals with their individuals versus the sovereignty of semiospheres and their persons (people has the double meaning of persons and a particular ontology i.e., a particularity. As defined by themselves.)

Cosmopolitanism in Decline:
The decline of arrogant cosmopolitanism after 100 years of activist social science!
A View from the Margins.
Tentative outline
Peter Emanuel Franks
© March 2025
• Globalization: Zero de Conduit
• The dangers of the Grand Plans/ Pie in the sky
• So let it be written so let it be done” said the Pharoah. Elites rushing things at the speed of thought rather than at the slow speed of real sensuous activity, which is required
• Infantile social engineering and it’s ‘unintended’ but/yet foreseeable consequences. Expanding into misguided regime change on an unimaginable scale with dire consequences for the entire world order.
• Information war on a global scale and within nation states and whatever grasping spheres of influence. Its propaganda by immersion through the cell phones.
The arrogance of the cosmopolitan and their consequent ignorance and disrespect of the ‘others’, the backward and the ‘deplorables’. The Rockefeller-Spelman foundation and the stimulation of the social sciences cheerled by Margaret Mead and others. The integrating system of values with the ‘coming of age of social science’ or what Mead describes as, “… the lost innocence of World WAR II, that truth can harm.” Thus she arrives at the following after serious discussions among the members of the Society for Applied Anthropology held in 1949.: Margaret Mead (1950) in her reflection of the decade 1939 – 1949  makes it quite plain that the social sciences have to manipulate the people for their own good. When discussing what anthropologists and social scientists in general, can contribute she wrote:
“Implement plans for altering our present culture, by recognising the importance of including the social scientist within his experimental material, and by recognizing that by working toward defined ends we commit ourselves to the manipulation of persons, and therefore to the negation of democracy. Only by working in terms of values which are limited to defining a direction, is it possible for us to use scientific methods in the control of the process without the negation of the moral autonomy of the human spirit”
But, this is not the only misdirection in the social sciences.
Clearly shades of the woke culture of today. A dead end or a new beginning?
• Disrespect for particularities and the imposition of the numerical democratic model.
• Premature totalization following the followers of Kant, though not Kant himself!
• Marx the cosmopolitan: Moses Hess’ rejection of Marx’s cosmopolitan internationalism, and idea of the “Universal Man” and who proposed that, “Internationalism should unite, not abolish, nations” 
• Hess’ argument is echoed somewhat in McDougal’s later important distinction between “cosmopolitan internationalism” and “national internationalism”.
• The rejection of particularities and their histories and cultures is an essential component of the beginning of social science where so called ]scientific] decisions are made by so-called ‘consensus’. That is politically, resulting in premature totalization of reality and its possibilities with the reduction of political, ethical, cultural and religious complexity to simplistic technical solutions.
• General, The Right Honourable Jan Christian Smuts’ Holism and Evolution as the birth of cosmopolitanism through Holism – “an ontological as well as a cosmological imminent Principle - the Ultimate Reality.” (p. 87-88)  Cf Hitlers understanding of history in guiding the Volk. We all have our ‘geists’
• McDougal versus the social anthropologists after Boas: Mead and others
• Boas, it is important to remember the origins and founder statements on Anthropology as represented by Frans Boas in the 1920’s, which capture this clear acceptance of this dominative social engineering attitude to others be they African, Jewish or whatever. This perspective is clearly expressed in Boas’ oft repeated paragraph from the conclusion of, “The Problems of the American Negro in America”, Yale Quarterly Review, p. 383, January 1921, and in concluding the chapter on, “The Negro in America”, in Race and Democratic Society ,1945 p. 81, as well as elsewhere):
“Thus, it would seem that man being what he is, the Negro problem will not disappear in America until the Negro blood has been so much diluted that it will no longer be recognised just as antisemitism will not disappear until the last vestige of the Jew as a Jew has disappeared”.
Boas’ assimilationist solution, which denies cultural differences, as well as the histories of particularities and their people, in fact suggests their demise, in favour of the secular universals of the West. Is this not a call for genocide?
• Nature/Nurture and the ideological victory of equity but smuggling genetics in through the back door
• The Liberal Consensus (Actually a convention)  Cancelling, McDougal, Eysenck, Carleton Coon etc. The first cancelling, Note: there is renewed effort to cancel McDougall for his eugenicist views by the APA.
• The Dominating Dialogue focussing the two sided message to the opinion leaders (cf two stage communications Katz)
• Censorship and filtering of science through the so-called liberal consensus, whereby scientific conflicts were resolved through ‘consensus’, locking in the premature totalization and the illusions of liberal cosmopolitanism, and laying the ground for other views to be defined as misinformation of whatever sort, and even racist, In the case of the race dialogue. However, reality does not disappear through such a sleight of hand (Umcentrieurung)
• “Umcentrieurung” and the illusion of democracy
• The Gestalt Psychology of Kurt Lewin and the illusion of . One could say there is nothing as good as a good theory / narrative.
• The fetishization of participation,
• Inclusion as an alibi for disrespect.
• Identity politics and the fetishization of individual difference (LGBTQ etc) (My friends transcultural miracle and Angela Davis’ surprise. Anything is possible
• The Strengthening of particularities
• The Boer War and the demise of British impunity, The first Afrikaans se “liberation” movement
• The liberation movements and self-determination usually lost in the grab for power and greed in the emerging nations
• Re-emergence of old Nationalisms in Europe
• Rise of Russia, China and India as well as other Asian, African and South American  countries what is commonly referred to as the Global South.
• Rise of indigenous power and voices (undoing the liberal standards of separate is by definition unequal, i.e., calls in Bolivia for separate and equal, multiple nationalities etc)
• The reemergence of a will to self determination among the particularities of all shapes and sizes.
• From indigeneity to spirit murder.

• Recognition of the pluriverse.
• Collapse of the dominating dialogue between Democracy and Communism
• Collapse of the liberal ideology with (paired to) the demise of Apartheid.
• Appearance of the multi polar world with the collapse of the Soviet Union, although the view that the world was uni-polar was held asway until around the outbreak of the Ukraine war
• Emergence of BRICS and other Asian international collectives which can challenge Western hegemony.
• Emergence of a competing approach to democracy What China calls “whole process democracy”?  Versus numerical democracy touted yet not practiced by the USA.
• The imminent decline of the cosmopolitan universe.
• Increasingly desperate religious fervour among the cosmopolitan elites, crisis politics (energy, covid, environment, food, mass migration, terrorism etc) crisis = terror
• The international monetary reset in progress
• Rise of alternative blocs and a myriad of particularities with their own voices, values and intentions.
• The failures of cosmopolitanism
• It is dangerous to do science by convention. It leads to premature totalization, censoring and cancelling viable alternatives. It comes back to haunt the enterprise of science. It requires open, thorough and critical dialogue and discussion can take place unhindered by ideological and political interests. (cf. societal psychology)
• The ideological failure of the cosmopolitan gaze. Too much certainty and mythologising
• The emerging conflict:
• International Cosmopolitan universalisms  versus particularites and pluriversalism towards multipolarity within and between countries guiding their own developmental objectives in a complimentary world where self determination and cooperation can evolve, without the domination of any hegemonic power(s).
• Hegemonic universals with their individuals versus the sovereignty of semiospheres and their persons (people has the double meaning of persons and a particular ontology i.e., a particularity. As defined by themselves.)

Pelota mixteca is a handball game that originated in Mexico’s southern state of Oaxaca. Because of the extensive labour migration that has taken (indigenous) migrants from Oaxaca to areas far removed from their hometowns, today, the game is also played in different parts of Mexico and the United States. In this chapter, I describe and analyse what could be called a bottom-up, rooted cosmopolitan practice of players of pelota mixteca. Faced with the choice between the ‘museumisation’ of the game on the one hand and its ‘detraditionalisation’ on the other, the playing community has tried to popularise pelota mixteca using transnational networks and ‘global forms’. In the second part of this paper, I briefly consider the broader ethical question of how a rooted cosmopolitan mindset can help us not only better understand the processes and cultures we are studying but also move past the artificial boundaries of ‘the field site’ and its implicit connotations of ‘out there’/’exotic’/’Other’. Following Meskell’s 2009 Cosmopolitan Archaeologies , I argue that a rooted cosmopolitan approach to the study of immaterial heritage can offer a fruitful way out of the perceived exclusionary binaries of local/global and traditional/modern.

_Migrating Minds: Journal of Cultural Cosmopolitanism_  (ISSN 2993-1053) is a new peer-reviewed, open-access scholarly journal devoted to interdisciplinary research on cultural cosmopolitanism from a comparative perspective. It provides a unique, international forum for innovative critical approaches to cosmopolitanism emerging from literatures, cultures, media, and the arts in dialogue with other areas of the humanities and social sciences, across temporal, spatial, and linguistic boundaries. By placing creative expressions at the center of a wide range of contemporary and historical intercultural relationships, the journal explores forms of belonging and spaces of difference and dissidence that challenge both universalist and exclusionary paradigms.
_Migrating Minds: Journal of Cultural Cosmopolitanism_ is hosted by Georgetown University, Washington D.C., and co-supported by the “Plurielles” Research Group, Bordeaux Montaigne University, France.
The Inaugural Issue is scheduled to appear in Fall 2023.
The journal invites submissions for its first regular issue, Vol. 1 (1), Spring 2024.
For inquiries about proposals, please contact the editors-in-chief at migratingminds@georgetown.edu by October 13, 2023.
Submission deadlines:
December 15, 2023 for full-text articles;
January 19, 2024 for book reviews and review articles.
Please visit: migratingminds.georgetown.edu
Twitter @MigratingMinds_

The sale of imported secondhand clothing (SHC) and counterfeits in African markets have been increasing while the manufacturing in apparel, clothing and textile has been on the decline. Most governments respond by raising duty and restricting the imports with limited success. While most researchers look at the issue from an economic perspective only, this paper looks at the effect of the trade in a combined holistic and behavioural perspective, since the flourishing of the trade is a combination of economic and behavioural consequences. The paper takes into consideration the trio aspect of consumer behaviour looking at the affects /cognitive aspects which are influenced by the environment and thus affect the consumer behaviour.It isproposed that combining Ivan Pavlov's Stimulus-Response Model of conditioned responses and Skinners behavioural modification model to change the African consumers' behaviour would be more effective than limiting the importation.

Auch die in London erscheinende Jewish Quarterly widmete in ihrer Frühjahrsausgabe von 1957 dem verstorbenen Isaac Steinberg einen Nachruf, aus dem ausschnittsweise zitiert wird: Everyone who knew him in the prime of life must have seen a certain resemblance of the late Dr. Steinberg to the traditional portraits of Jesus, particular that of the painter Hoffmann. […] In a sense Dr. Steinberg was a man of destiny. There have been many Jewish leaders in our time, but few have so impressed people as did the head of Freeland League. […] In his later years he could be taken for a publicist turned statesman-a composite European in physique and physiognomy, yet he was an Orthodox Jew in creed and observance.[…] Dr. Steinberg was destined early in life to play an important part in human affairs; for at the age of 29 he became Commissar of Justice in Lenin's Cabinet, but his own conception of justice stemming from the Prophets was so remote from that of the Bolsheviks that he soon found himself in conflict with the powerful Soviet leader, and was imprisoned. […] His escape to Germany, and after Hitler's deadly machinations, to England; his cultural activities in South Africa and socio-political explorations in Australia, his later residence in the United States, and frequent excursions to Mexico and Canada are sufficient to give one a glimpse of the mercurial spirit which activated the man.

This paper argues that the average Sinhala language literary reader's literary consciousness has been shaped by the influence of many other literary cultures because of the availability of translated works from numerous cultures. In that sense, even the readers who read only in her native language, Sinhala, her literary consciousness is remarkably cosmopolitan. Though, a cosmopolitan person is someone fluent in more than one language, typical Sinhala readers of modern literature are 'rooted cosmopolitans' even when they read in a Single language.

Die Nation als Figur der Identität: Ja! Aber keine Nation jenseits, keine Nation gegen den Universalismus der Internationale! Internationalismus, Kosmopolitismus andererseits wird eine leere Suppe, wenn darin keine bestimmten Identitäten sich befinden: Also muß doch in allem Internationalismus die Identität der besonderen Nation stecken, so wie in allem Universalismus/Globalismus immer auch die Identität des Besonderen stecken muß. Nationalismus: Die Nation als eine "absolute Identität" andererseits erschlägt sich im Grund selber, weil sie aus ihrer je eigenen Gewalt nicht herauskommt. Denn jede Nation als absolute Identität kann immer nur auf Gewalt basieren. Dann aber, wenn Nation sich im Fokus der Internationale positioniert, dann, in dieser Dialektik, wird die Nation als Figur identisch, aber sie wird identisch eben nur in der Figur der Internationalen! Oder nur identisch im Gefüge der Internationalen, des Universalismus, des Kosmopolitismus. Von Nation also ist durchaus zu reden! Die Linke darf diese Dimension und Kategorie nicht den Rechten überlassen, weil die Rechten dann damit Schindluder betreiben. Die Rechten setzen Nation immer abstrakt-identisch, nationalistisch. Die Rechten setzen Nation immer abstrakt und gewalttätig als eine totale Identität, die aber immer eine abstrakte Identität ist, und die immer eine bornierte Identität ist. Nation aber als Figur der globalen, der universalen Weltoffenheit, ist immer nur eine des Geistes. Denn diese Nation muß ja immer ihre eigene Identität im Spiegel, im Bilde dieser Welt sehen. Darin aber bildet sich Geist. Geist ist immer nur einer der Differenz. Geist ist immer eine Differenzgestalt. Darin aber ist aller Geist erst lebendig, real.

This dissertation asserts that the tortuous relationship Spanish American literature had with cosmopolitanism since the Wars of Independence reached a turning point towards the end of the second half of the twentieth century. While the literary production of the nineteenth and most of the twentieth century was centred on the Spanish American nation and the continent, contemporary literature has become increasingly deterritorialized, and has begun to present narrative worlds and discuss issues that transcend this circumscribed universe. The discerning of this articulation of global issues in contemporary literature – which I contend is predicated on the concept of cosmopolitanism – is the primary objective of this investigation. The five novels examined here are Elena Poniatowska’s La “Flor de Lis” (1988), Mario Vargas Llosa’s El Paraíso en la otra esquina (2003) and El sueño del celta (2010), and Jorge Volpi’s El fin de la locura (2003) and No será la Tierra (2006). This study aims ...

The bad girl. London: Faber and Faber Limited. The Bad Girl comprises of seven sections, exploring more of the urbanization of the 1960s and 1980s in Peru. In this fictional autobiography by a single narrator, Llosa uses his most frequent theme, 'the way in which individual lives are played against the backdrop of International politics and irresistible currents of politics'. However, he artistically designs the protagonist Peruvian émigré Ricardo (Richardoito) Somocurcio, with no political interest, completely distant among Latin Americans in the revolutionary passion by young Peruvians. Llosa uses the great mixture of realistic and fanciful index to reveal the politics pervading his characters. Although Ricardo and the Bad Girl maintained individuality, many of the other characters experienced revolutionary politics.

This dissertation asserts that the tortuous relationship Spanish American literature had with cosmopolitanism since the Wars of Independence reached a turning point towards the end of the second half of the twentieth century. While the literary production of the nineteenth and most of the twentieth century was centred on the Spanish American nation and the continent, contemporary literature has become increasingly deterritorialized, and has begun to present narrative worlds and discuss issues that transcend this circumscribed universe. The discerning of this articulation of global issues in contemporary literature – which I contend is predicated on the concept of cosmopolitanism – is the primary objective of this investigation. The five novels examined here are Elena Poniatowska’s La “Flor de Lis” (1988), Mario Vargas Llosa’s El Paraíso en la otra esquina (2003) and El sueño del celta (2010), and Jorge Volpi’s El fin de la locura (2003) and No será la Tierra (2006). This study aims to describe and assess an evolving perspective on the treatment of cosmopolitanism in Spanish America. I trace the shift from the previous generations’ main preoccupation with aesthetic cosmopolitanism, which sought to engage Latin American literary discourse with the Western canon, to what I identify as the current political implication of the concept. To this end, I show that whereas mid-twentieth century authors displaced cosmopolitanism in favour of more politically expedient concepts, authors now plot it in their novels as a means of discussing issues of identity and citizenship in an increasingly globalized world.

La Mondialisation. Histoire et sciences sociales. Blaise Wilfert S1, 6 ECTS Ce cours d'initiation s'adresse à tous les étudiants intéressés, sans pré-requis. Il vise à introduire aux sciences sociales de la mondialisation, un continent entier d'études en sociologie, en science politique, en anthropologie, en économie et en géographie, selon lesquelles notre monde est dorénavant global, c'est-à-dire unifié par un réseau dense d'interconnexions de tous ordres qui transforment en profondeur les conditions de la vie des sociétés. Et à société globale sciences sociales nouvelles : depuis les années 1970 s'est largement imposée l'idée que toutes les sciences sociales devaient connaître un tournant global, qui impliquait à la fois une redéfinition de leurs objectifs, une réorientation de leurs méthodes et une réorganisation de leur géopolitique. L'enjeu de ce cours est de donner un aperçu général de cette vaste et riche bibliographie, mais aussi de la mettre en discussion et en tension avec ce que dit la discipline historique de ces mêmes sujets. L'histoire a en effet connu aussi, au cours des trois décennies précédentes, une forme de "tournant global", en partie lié à la poussée des sciences sociales du global, mais aussi, comme pour elles d'ailleurs, à la pression des discours politiques contemporains sur la radicale nouveauté de notre époque et ce que cette révolution de la "mondialisation" impliquerait. Or le moins qu'on puisse dire est que l'histoire globale, qui implique aussi inévitablement une histoire de la mondialisation, interroge radicalement le grand récit présentiste des sciences sociales, selon lesquelles nous serions maintenant dans un monde global. Il s'agira donc, par cette initiation croisée aux sciences sociales globales et à l'histoire de la mondialisation, de poser la question : dans quel temps sommes-nous ?

"When we spoke, nobody listened to us, / So we have taken the noise of gunpowder as our rhythm / And the sound of machine-guns as our melody" - one might wonder if these words are taken from an Anurag Kashyap film. The answer is: these lines form the second stanza of _Qassaman_ (We Pledge), the national anthem of Algeria. The present research project offers a critical-affective reading of the lyrics of some select national anthems of the world that appear to be 'violent' in diction, imagery, and allusion. It explores if 'violent' national anthems testify to the inevitable contingency of violence: what is praised by one nation as necessary bonding of the 'arms' (e.g. fellows hand in hand during war) might appear to others as nothing more than uncritical adoption of 'arms' (ammunition, violent mechanism).
.
The present reading is premised upon three questions: first, if and how violence constructs and preserves national identity and self-identity; second, if the invocation of 'violence' (e.g. "May the tyrant"s foul blood water our furrows" in France"s _La Marseillaise_) in a song that may have fit the turmoil of the emergence of a nation suits the same way when that song is adopted as a national anthem and being sung by, say, the school children every day; and, third, how a national anthem takes into account the 'other.' The paper unfolds in two core sections. The first one, on the poetics and politics of 'violent' national anthems, locates and interprets violent words and images in 17 national anthems. The second section addresses the problematics of 'violent' national anthems: it locates and critiques the negotiation between violence and revolution and that between violence and nation-formation. Reviewing Tagores' conceptualization of the 'visva,' Fanonian constructive violence, Levinas' alterity, Butler's grievability, and Appiah's rooted cosmopolitanism, the paper explores the tension between a country's 'chauvinistic' national anthem and projected cosmopolitanism. It demonstrates how a national anthem often foregrounds the hierarchies of the other: while it upholds the ethnic and spatial identities of the 'internal' others and finds the loss of their rights and lives as grievable, it tends to discount the existence of the 'external' others and consider the violation of their rights and lives as non-grievable. Such biased if not entirely unethical propositions jeopardize the questions of humanity, of cosmopolitanism, and of 'visva.'
.
Apropos of the contemporary rise in ethno-chauvinism and refugee crisis, the paper reasons that increasing critical ethical-empathic understanding of the contingency of nationalist discourses is likely to generate culture of critical tolerance and environment of conciliation.

Comment écrire et penser l'Afrique dans le monde ? Comment écrire et penser le monde depuis l'Afrique ? Par la mise à jour du dialogue, dynamique et complexe, entre trois notions de prime abord très différentes – le panafricanisme, le cosmopolitisme et l'afropolitanisme –, cet ouvrage interroge la participation des lettres africaines à la réinvention du monde contemporain. Les écrivains qui se sont engagés dans le mouvement panafricain au cours du XX e siècle ont eu comme principale cible l'impérialisme colonial et le morcellement du continent auquel il a donné lieu. Réaliser l'unité africaine faisait alors écho à l'idéal cosmopolite dès lors qu'il s'agissait de desserrer l'étau des assignations identitaires. Au tournant du XXI e siècle, le mot-valise afropolitanisme est inventé pour contrer la tentation afrocentriste d'un repli identitaire du continent face aux dérives d'un nouvel impérialisme mondia-lisé. L'afropolitanisme met l'Afrique en circulation dans une géographie planétaire pour porter une voix décentralisée. Le débat fructueux qui s'engage aujourd'hui entre les héritiers du mouvement panafricain et les tenants de l'afropolitanisme témoigne des préoccupations cosmopolitiques des littératures d'Afrique et de la diaspora.

Kwame Anthony Appiah (London, 1954) is one of the most renowned philosophers of contemporary thought. His work in the field of ethics and moral reach diverse subjects as sexual orientation, nationalism, social discrimination on ethnic or religious reasons and responsibility of governments and international organizations in development and poverty eradication.

Integrating concepts from transnationalism, cosmopolitanism, identity and cultural studies, this study presents a conceptual framework for examining how identity is constructed and construed in transnational spaces. Such a topic is currently significant in a time where increasing globalization and mediatization have led to the rise of a generation of ‘armchair travelers’. As a consequence an individual’s sense of place and belonging are simultaneously transformed. These processes form the basis for examining the conflicts and dilemmas of those working in China’s media system, which is said to be a transnational space in transformation and transition. Six in-depth interviews were conducted with Chinese journalists who work in English-language news media in China. The data confirms that there is little editorial independence from the political and ideological frameworks that control China’s media system. The data also offers a fresh perspective on how defining structures impact the cosmopolitan identity. In the analysis, theoretical implications are discussed, reconceptualizing the ways in which we understand the local, place, space, value orientations, and an individual’s sense of belonging.

This article is based on a study of The Reluctant Fundamentalist (2007), a novel by a Pakistani writer Mohsin Hamid. The novel is based on the story of transformation of an expat Pakistani living in New York from a true cosmopolitan to a nationalist. The article will explore the crisis of identity suffered by the protagonist in a new land where he reached as an immigrant student and worker. However, he experienced a resurgence of nationalist and patriotic sentiments within him as 9/ 11 happened in 2001. The force of American nationalism that was imperial in nature, resulting in the invasion of Afghanistan and Iran, triggered resentment in the protagonist who decided to leave America and went back to the country of his origin, Pakistan. During his stay in America, the protagonist
redefined fundamentalism as an imperial tendency in the American system while rejecting the accusations hurled towards him of an Islamic fundamentalist. The article will explain that there is a loss of cosmopolitan virtue in the post 9/11 era and the dream of universal peace and harmony is shattered due to unbridled state ambitions to invade foreign territories. The article will conclude with the assertion that the loss of cosmopolitanism and reassertion of national identities give way to confrontation and intolerance destroying the prospects of peace and harmony in a globalized world.

This study assesses the extent to which consumers of second-hand clothing (SHC) in Bolivia can be understood as 'rooted cosmopolitans', individuals who believe themselves to be 'citizens of the world', “attached to a home of one's own, with its own cultural particularities,
but taking pleasure from the presence of other, different places that are home to other, different people” (Appiah 1997: 618).

The theory of rooted cosmopolitanism is applied to show that these consumers exemplify a really existing, modern, global Bolivia, using the specificity of imported, foreign SHC clothing to construct a multiplicity of identities allowing local and global citizenships to coexist, instead of being dichotomised.

Assessing the extent to which these consumers are rooted cosmopolitan is intended to address a gap in the scholarship on the use of clothing in identity creation, in the Andes and Bolivia, for understanding emergent, contemporary uses of clothing in identity creation not led by indigenous or traditional cultures.

Using a mixture of structured surveys, semi-structured interviews and informal discussions with consumers, this study examines middle class SHC consumption in two cities, La Paz/El Alto and Cochabamba. In so doing, it challenges the perception that this type of consumption in developing nations is subaltern and without agency. Dispatching with this misconception, it then shows how consumers in these cities use the foreign, 'Western' specificity of SHC to construct identities that build cultural and social capital from its use, including cloaking against discrimination, challenging permitted ethno-political identities, becoming more upwardly mobile, and appearing more intimately acquainted with 'the world outside'.

Concurrently, this study shows how that does not challenge the sense of indigenous, cultural, national, and regional citizenship these consumers possess, and that SHC is also used as a way to display those local citizenships to a Bolivia “with its own cultural particularities”.