8. Rereading Kantian Hospitality for the Present

Huseyinzadegan, Dilek

doi:10.1515/9780748695508-011

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Commentators on Kant and race have insisted that even if we accept that Kant changed his view for good, nevertheless, one cannot read his whole body of work as consistently anti-racist (Gani, 2017) and this tells us something about racism in general and Kant's racism, in particular (Allais, 2016). It is further claimed that Kant's hospitality reduces hospitality to mere conditions for the possibility of commercial enterprise, making the refugee crises a protraction of colonial injustice (Huseyinzadegan, 2019). Throughout this discussion, I have argued for a different reading of hospitality in Kant.…”

Section: Kant Colonialism and Race: Some Caveatsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A human right to political membership & the right to territory

Khwaja

2023

Journal of International Political Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The global justice debates frame the right to political membership and territorial rights by focusing on stateless individuals/refugees as claimants of the former and sovereign states as the claimants of the latter. Kant’s Right to Hospitality is often employed to reinforce this mode of framing rights. However, this mode of framing rights can lead to possible neglect of a people as an equally important right claimant. I employ a context-oriented interpretation of Kant’s right to Hospitality to highlight the non-state people’s claims to political membership and territory. I suggest that in Kant, while the non-state people are not in a civil condition, we can nevertheless recognize their provisional claims to the territory, which are forceful enough to exclude outsiders. Furthermore, the non-state people cannot be forced into a political membership with us or each other because we do not know the nature of obligations they may have towards each other. Recognizing these limits of our understanding can encourage philosophically thought-out modes of reframing indigenous people’s claims in our theoretical debates. In practice, it can promote an insightful attitude in negotiating their terms of political membership and land claims against the sovereign states.

show abstract

Section: Kant Colonialism and Race: Some Caveatsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A human right to political membership & the right to territory

Khwaja

2023

Journal of International Political Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The EU’s Hospitality and Welcome Culture: Conceiving the “No Human Being Is Illegal” Principle in the EU Fundamental Freedoms and Migration Governance

Aliu

2022

Hum Rights Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article aims to highlight the theoretical and philosophical debate on hospitality underlining the normative elements of framing migrants and refugees as individual agents in the light of hospitality theory and migration governance. It argued the critiques of the neo-Kantian hospitality approach and the EU welcome culture with regard to refugees in the EU from a philosophical perspective. The “No human being is illegal” motto is proposed to be conceived as a principle of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. The cosmopolitan right to visit and the universal right to reside were discussed in the context of human rights and co-responsibility. Linking the hospitality approach with migration governance enables the reconstruction of reception policies and practices, diversification of non-state actors that engage in migration governance mechanism, and polarization of political initiatives (e.g., politics of allocation and dispersal, readmission negotiations, convergence/divergence of priorities and strategic interests). The research findings highlight that the EU adopted a neo-Kantian hospitality approach that combines both “co-responsibility” and “vertical/heterarchical relations.” The EU’s “New Pact on Migration and Asylum” was considered proof of how the EU follows neo-Kantian hospitality that is manifested in dualism and contradictory approach. The study presents a typology that splits co-responsibility into individual/institutional actions and human rights/migration governance.

show abstract

Charles Mills’ ‘Black Radical Kantianism’ as a Plot Twist for Kant Studies and Contemporary Kantian-Liberal Political Philosophy

Huseyinzadegan

2022

Kantian rev.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article shows that the methodology of Mills’ ‘Black Radical Kantianism’ (BRK) represents a major plot twist for Kant studies as well as contemporary political philosophy utilizing Kantian ideas. BRK is no mere upgrade of Kant’s or Kantian ideal theory for racial justice. Mills’ methodology requires us to posit both that the real Kant and establishment Kantianism have been racist, sexist and Eurocentric; and that only by first admitting and reckoning with the compatibility of white supremacy and liberal egalitarianism can we hope to radicalize Kant or Kantianism.

show abstract

8. Rereading Kantian Hospitality for the Present

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

A human right to political membership & the right to territory

A human right to political membership & the right to territory

The EU’s Hospitality and Welcome Culture: Conceiving the “No Human Being Is Illegal” Principle in the EU Fundamental Freedoms and Migration Governance

Charles Mills’ ‘Black Radical Kantianism’ as a Plot Twist for Kant Studies and Contemporary Kantian-Liberal Political Philosophy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About