September 29-30, 2017: at the Workshop of the Research Group on Global Justice, McGill University.

I'll be presenting chapters 2 and 4 (thanks Catherine Lu!) of my book manuscript:

From Neo-Kantian Cosmopolitanism Toward a Horizontal Reading of Kant’s Principles


This chapter examines the ways in which the Eurocentrism and narrow concerns of Kantian cosmopolitanism persist in contemporary approaches to cosmopolitanism indebted to Kant. This is what I identify as the interpretive task of deconstruction. I do not mean the Derridean type of “deconstruction”, but the interpretive practice of identifying how hierarchical strands of a framework may resurface in approaches indebted to it. Interpretively, this means not taking the framework’s egalitarianism at face value, but unpacking the particular practices of theorization and their substantive effects on the cosmopolitan substance of the inquiry or lack thereof. This interpretive step of deconstruction is necessary because a simple update of Kant that embeds his framework in a liberal egalitarian understanding of world politics is insufficient to rid the framework of the three forms of Eurocentrism, outlined in the introduction, in a way that would lead to equal concern. Despite the egalitarian “update,” neo-Kantian scholars continue to deflect the question of hierarchy because they remain disproportionately invested in theorizing cosmopolitanism as appearing in a federative form of nominally equal states (federative Eurocentrism); as associated exclusively with Western-led and Western-dominated multilateral organizations (ahistorical Eurocentrism); and without engaging with intellectual and political resources located outside of the Western canon (unworldly Eurocentrism).


Race, Empire and Identity: Du Bois’s Transnational Political Subjectivity



In this chapter I make the normative case to recuperate identity for cosmopolitanism. I do this by tracking the transformation of the political subject at the center of Du Bois’s project of emancipation between the early twentieth century and the 1930s. In particular, I pay attention to two features in this trajectory. First, I examine the way in which, despite Du Bois’s early transnational outlook, his early conceptualization of the question of consciousness is predominantly centered in the domestic sphere. Second, I examine and make sense of a new transnational consciousness that appears in Du Bois’s 1920s writings and his seldom-studied writings on segregation in the 1930s. Third, I explore how transnational consciousness emerges through new forms of identification with transnational colonial subjects. The identity that emerges from this process is based on common (yet heterogeneous) experiences of racial oppression but is also determined politically through process of exchange with and learning from others affected by imperial and capitalist oppression, and is thus inherently subject to contestation. This form of consciousness can fuel new ways of being in the world that can in turn underpin an emancipatory political subjectivity. Transnational identity in this account relies on difference not as a source of antagonism or rejection, but as an attempt to build a composite picture of domination that supports projects of emancipation; it is oppositional toward imperial projects without containing a will to dominate. In closing, I contrast this picture with the way in which identity is theorized in the cosmopolitan literature.