The intermezzo explains the relationship between Parts I and II of the book and the methodological shifts entailed in this transition. Part I makes a normative case for protest sensibilities that are critical of hegemonic understandings and practices of both cosmopolitanism and communitarianism. Beginning from the premise that attitudes towards boundaries are predicated on assumptions about the locus of threats to vital interests, Part I demonstrates that hegemonic understandings of cosmopolitanism and communitarianism are underpinned by simplistic imaginaries of threat that offer plausible but partial inventories of the sources of threats to human rights. In contrast, the political thinkers and activists studied in Part II adopt more complex assumptions about the locus of such threats, recognizing that threats to human rights emanate from outside and within the state and from the state itself. This recognition induces them to occupy a space between cosmopolitanism and nationalism in their thinking about the meaning of boundaries.
Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.