7/29/2019 Ciprian NITU

1/2

Ciprian Niu

Cosmopolitism i migraie. Interpretri contemporane

ale ideii kantiene de ospitalitate.

Kant introduce termenul de drept cosmopolit (Weltbuergerrecht) n al TreileaArticol al eseului su despre Pacea Etern (1795/6), cu referire la datoria ospitalitii.Aceast datorie este interesant deoarece atinge problema strinului care intr n contactcu o entitate politic organizat i delimitat teritorial, i anume un stat. Un aspectparticular al acestui contact este surprins n dezbaterea contemporan cu privire ladrepturile politice ale imigranilor (care includ problema ceteniei refugiailor,azilanilor, apatrizilor sau apersoanelor dezrdcinate). Un alt aspect important al acestuicontact care apare n legtur cu problema srciei i inegalitii economice globale, estechestiunea eliminrii restriciilor cu privire la imigrare ca modalitate prin care statelebogatepot s-i ndeplineascobligaiile fa de sracii lumii.

Dac la Kant obligaia de ospitalitate rmne o obligaie sprijinit voluntar dectre suveranul politic, gnditorii i teoreticienii contemporani ai cosmopolitismului suntinteresai n construirea unui spaiu conceptual i legal care trece dincolo de suveranitateastatelor neleas n sens westfalian i care este constrngtor att pentru actorii statali cti pentru cei nonstatali atunci cnd acetia intr n contact cu strinii care nu aparinentitii politice organizate i delimitate teritorial.

Dei regimul internaional al migraiei transnaionale stabilit prin DeclaraiaUniversal a Drepturilor Omului din 1948 recunoate doar dreptul de emigrare, nu idreptul de imigrare, i, aa cum observa Seila Benhabib, este prins ntre suveranitate iospitalitate, adic ntre prerogativa de a fi de partea normelor cosmopolite actuale iobligaia de a extinde recunoaterea acestor norme, la nivel regional, european cel puin,asistmpe de alt partela o evoluie remarcabil a normelor ospitalitii. Prin ceea ce s-arputea numi, cu o expresie a lui Benhabib, un proces de reiterare democratic, tot maimuli oameni care nu mprtesc identitatea colectiv a rii gazd, se bucur, din ce nce mai mult, de anumite drepturi i beneficii, att sociale ct i politice, ca i muncitoristrini sau rezideni permaneni. n aceast perspectiv, ospitalitatea deschide caleatransferului gradual ctre strinial drepturilor politice asociate n mod tradiionale cucetenia.

Pe de alt parte, teoreticienii cosmopoliisusin deschiderea granielor, cel puinn cazul statelor liberal democratice bogate. Statele democratice liberale bogate nu potfolosi, consider acetia, resursele rii n beneficiul exclusiv al cetenilor lor. Dacpentru egalitaritii liberali oamenii sunt egali din punct de vedere moral, rezult cbunstarea fiecrei persoane conteaz la fel de mult i, astfel, n condiiile unei distribuiiinternaionale inegale a resurselor, egalitaritii liberali nu pot accepta un sistem al

granielor care i condamn pe unii oameni s triasc n srcie n timp ce altor oamenile permite s duc o via plin de privilegii. Plecnd de la acest raionament, ospitalitateaeste deschis unei interpretri din direcia justiiei economice globale.

7/29/2019 Ciprian NITU

2/2

Ciprian Niu

Cosmopolitanism and migration.

Contemporary interpretations ofKantian idea of hospitality

Kant introduces the concept of cosmopolitan law (Weltbuergerrecht) in the third

article of his essay on Perpetual Peace (1795/6), when he refers to the duty of hospitality.This duty of hospitality is remarkable because it reaches the problem of stranger who

comes into contact with an organized and territorially delimited political entity, namely a

state. A particular aspect of this contact is discussed in contemporary debate on politicalrights of immigrants (which include the problem of citizenship for refugees, asylumseekers, stateless or displaced persons). Another important aspect of this contact that

appears in relation to the problem of global poverty and economic inequality is the

question of elimination of restrictions on immigration as a means through which affluent

states can discharge their obligations to the global poor.If for Kant the duty of hospitality is only voluntary supported by the political

sovereign, contemporary thinkers and theorists of cosmopolitanism are interested in

building a conceptual and legal space which goes beyond states sovereignty (in aWestphalian sense) and which is binding both for state actors and for non-state actors

when they enter into contact with strangers who are not members of that organized andterritorially delimited political entity.

Although the international regime of trans-national migration set by the Universal

Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 recognizes only the right of emigration, not also

the right of immigration and, as Seila Benhabib observes, it is caught between

sovereignty and hospitality, i.e. between the prerogative of being on the part of currentcosmopolitan norms and the obligation to extend their recognition, on regional level on

the other hand, or on European level at least, we are witnessing a remarkable evolution of

hospitality norms. In what might be called, with a Benhabibs expression, a process ofdemocratic iteration, more and more peoples who do not share the collective identity ofthe host countryas foreign workers or permanent residents are increasingly enjoyingmore rights and benefits which are both social and political. From this perspective,

hospitality opens the way of gradual transfer towards strangers of political rightstraditionally associated with citizenship.

On the other hand, the theorists of cosmopolitanism advocate the adoption of

open borders at least in the case of affluent liberal states. Affluent liberal democraticstates should not use the countrys resources in the exclusive benefit of their citizens. Iffor liberal egalitarians the human individuals are equal from a moral point of view, then

the welfare of a person must matter for them as much as the welfare of any other person.

So, given the unequal international distribution of resources between states, liberal

egalitarians cannot accept any system of boundaries which condemns some people topoverty while permitting others to live a life full of privileges. Given this reasoning, the

hospitality is open to interpretation from global economic justice perspective.