Abstract

The various processes of globalization---economic, social, political, and cultural---have challenged, and continue to challenge, traditional forms of solidarity-building, particularly those associated with nation-states. Recognizing this, Jurgen Habermas has proposed a type of "cosmopolitan solidarity" that is intended to fill the solidaric and integrative gaps triggered by globalization. The problem, however, is that Habermas's concept serves only as a form of moral-legal solidarity---i.e. Habermasian cosmopolitan solidarity only serves to establish a moral-legal solidaric bond among individuals. While this moral component is necessary, it fails to address any substantive ethical solidarities that can be established at a postnational, cosmopolitan level. This is especially important as the solidaric "gaps" or challenges initiated by globalization are both moral and ethical in nature. Yet Habermas, via his form of cosmopolitan solidarity, is convinced that only a moral-legal form of solidarity can be established at a cosmopolitan level; and this moral form of cosmopolitan solidarity can successfully resolve both the moral-legal and ethical solidaric and integrative challenges raised by globalization. The present project argues that this is not the case. In order to address and resolve the integrative and solidaric challenges posed by globalization, a comprehensive form of solidarity is required---one with both moral and ethical components. The project concludes by outlining a two-track theory of cosmopolitan solidarity, explicating how this comprehensive theory of solidarity works to resolve both the moral and ethical solidaric-integrative challenges initiated by the processes of globalization