Afghanistan, COVID-19, and the Error of Neo-Cosmopolitanism

The “noble but flawed” goal of cosmopolitanism is to embrace a fundamental “respect for humanity” says philosopher Martha Nussbaum in her work: The Cosmopolitan Tradition. She reflects on the historical philosophy of cosmopolitanism — and its deep roots — extending as far back as Immanuel Kant’s philosophy on universal perpetual peace, to Diogenes conceptualizing the “citizen of the world” in Ancient Greece. The ideas focus on a collection of ethics and morals that the world must promote regarding peace and the good. David Held describes a classical sense of cosmopolitanism centered around equal worth and dignity, personal agency, and accountability mirroring Lockean and Cartesian enlightenment values of freedom and autonomy. However, Held opines on a modern change in the direction of a “cultural cosmopolitanism” with the intention of homogenizing cultures with social, economic, and political outcomes for the “possibility of a cosmopolitan order”. The new age cosmopolitanism, or neo-cosmopolitanism, is the adulterated version of classical cosmopolitan thinking based on identitarianism – rather than choice-based freedom and divergency.

New York Times columnist Ross Douthat describes the climate of neo-cosmopolitanism as this hegemonic order coalescing around the exotic foods and different spiritualities that individuals partake aesthetically – in the creation of an “elite tribalism”. The neo-cosmopolitan is less about adventure and more the ‘exclusivity’ of certain elite norms, suggesting food of the American Southwest for $50 a plate in SOHO is preferential; thus, no need to visit New Mexico or Arizona. The myth is that neo-cosmopolitanism is a superficial experience according to Douthat, with a sense of smugness in the claim ‘we may be these people, but at least we are not those people’. Many of these ‘adventurers’ take up the mantle of lawyer, doctor, journalists who love the free-range venison at the swanky new spot in the Upper East Side, but would not dare track a buck with a bottle of doe urine in their satchel waiting for hours for the perfect shot, sometimes to no success.

Reading the Douthat piece reminds me of some of the issues we are facing today, notably the withdrawal from Afghanistan and COVID. I cannot help but combine the thought process of neo-cosmopolitanism and how we have handled these two situations; in many ways, we have neo-cosmopolitan leaders at the helm. As we have seen with the coverage, the neoliberal and neoconservative factions have joined forces in this neo-cosmopolitan mindset. Thus, equal calls for the continued support of bombing and military campaigns in the name of ‘nation building’ and displacing medieval religious doctrines with diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. Sounds noble, until one look at The Afghanistan Papers by Greg Whitlock suggest that the role of nation building and cosmopolitan initiatives were a mere front for the Big 5 gravy train to falsely justify a ‘winning war’ in a clear losing situation. COVID acts similarly to Afghanistan, considering the actions of government, medical, and academic elites over the past 20 months or so. Certainly, the biggest story right now is about Ivermectin and the political battle that has come from it. Media outlets describe Ivermectin as ‘idiots ingesting horse paste’ all while a meta-analysis of randomized control trials show Ivermectin benefits for COVID. Of course, Another example of failed nobility from the cosmopolitan class: “we (cosmopolitans) are all in this together”, “if it could just save one (cosmopolitan) life”.

What is it about these proclivities? The nation building, the forceful public health? Why does it seem the neo-cosmopolitan is not very open to new experiences? Well, it confirms Held’s thesis of the neo-cosmopolitan order doing away with expression and accepting a homogenized culture through social, political, and economic means. Thus, the ‘nation building’ is not an American vision, it is a global vision for how the United States – along with NGO’s – want Afghanistan to be without accepting the reality of what it is: a disputed, tribal, and unconquered land throughout history. COVID is this ushering of a new normal with economies and cultures merging to benefit society – and the ESG portfolios of investment firms.

I think it is abundantly clear who the neo-cosmopolitans are, and it comes down to class. They are the NYC and DC journalists, neo-con/lib politicians, institutional academics and administrators, public health experts, Wall Street, K Street, and the Military Industrial Complex all coalescing around the new phrase of the Professional Managerial Class (PMC). It is in their “characterless opportunism” – as described by Hans Magnus Enzensberger – where their class comprising of social, economic, and geographic characteristics makes them oblivious to the actual world around them. This is the ‘exclusive elite tribalism’ and ‘cultural cosmopolitanism’ that embraces the adventure of a worldly view via a narrow perspective outside the realism of what the world is.

Neo-cosmopolitans suffer from the Is-Ought Fallacy. David Hume – in his infinite wisdom – suggested there are empirical truths in the world, although one may feel they ought not to be. To the neo-cosmopolitans: Afghanistan is a tribal nation, with warring clans and a strict medieval theistic autocracy, but it ought to be our version of Western democracy. COVID-19 is a virus that will replicate like all other viruses as we continue our losing battle with microbes; but we ought to try and eradicate it through seemingly waning vaccines and cloth over our faces.

The formal error of neo-cosmopolitanism leads to the disease of arrogance and hypocrisy.

Neo-cosmopolitanism – is itself – self-contradictory in the affirmation of poor reasoning. PMC individuals in our modern landscape are drowning in their own contradictory affirmation. Have it be the embrace of yellow journalism in manufacturing clicks; bipartisan support of needless wars and capitulation to lobbyists; academic institutions more focused on legal liability protection than protection of free speech; public health experts beholden to NGO’s and multinational pharma companies than the health of the public; and the multi-colored logos for corporations, including military organizations, colors of the rainbow reflecting each skin color that was burned from the manufactured bombs and war machines. This is obviously a problem and contributing to our divisive discourse.

So, what can we do about this problem? Well, enter Barry Buzan who once debated David Held in “Realism vs. Cosmopolitanism” for some answers. Buzan suggests a reconfiguration for realism in accepting sovereignty and divergent domains as to avoid the ills of hegemonic control and power centralization of cosmopolitanism. Furthermore, that the realist stance accepts different national ideologies work together with different forms of democratization for the benefit in dealing with complex global issues. Neo-cosmopolitans will have to wrestle with their acceptance of their naivete, and the dynamic world that we live in. Sure, they ought to have the best intentions to their proclivities in mind; however, this is not how the world works.