Because of its rhetorical nature, the notion of cosmopolitanism is sometimes understood as having a fixed definition. As this is not the case, parts of this overstrained concept have been replaced by the concept of conviviality. In some discussions, Immanuel Kant’s understanding of hospitality as a cosmopolitan right has been criticised and, in some cases, this has resulted in a rejection of the idea of cosmopolitanism. This has not least been the case in recent debates about refugee arrivals in Europe. This chapter, however, argues that it is worth paying attention to the historicity of conceptual frameworks, and that cosmopolitanism should not be abandoned, but instead be read as a utopian idea—as a reflexive method for imagining better or alternative futures in time and space.

Within intellectual history there has been a widening interest over the last decades in rediscovering intellectuals who used to be renowned when they were active, but who for various reasons have been more or less forgotten over time. The Swedish writer Ellen Key (1849–1926) was a famous intellectual who gained her reputation through books, pamphlets, and hundreds of lectures on topics such as pedagogy, peace, and women’s rights—topics that were at the top of a general intellectual agenda around 1900. I will focus on her idea of internationalism that was founded on an evolutionary life philosophy of development. Her engagement in internationalism was built on an idealist foundation of philosophical, religious, and humanitarian beliefs organized around peace and a problematization of the nation. Key advocated a kind of patriotism as her path towards developing internationalism. In this article, Key’s work is contextualized and conceptualized in the discussion of internationalism of her contemporaries.

This dissertation, a contribution to the history of ideas, is a study of Immanuel Kant’s 1795 monograph Zum ewigen Frieden (Perpetual Peace) and its effective history. The intention is to show how this particular work has been formed, read, discussed and interpreted for about 200 years. Considering the attention the work received on its bicentennial anniversary in comparison with the attention it had received before that, there is a good reason for studying it in a long perspective. This book consists of three parts. In part I, the focus is directed on the situation in which Kant wrote Perpetual Peace. The peace treaty tradition and the view of war and peace are dealt with as a background for the ideas and the reception of Kant’s peace treaty. The form and content of Perpetual Peace are discussed as well as its relation to Kant’s critical philosophy. Part II focuses on the principle ideas in Perpetual Peace: how a peaceful society founded on principles of rights is possible. Kant’s solution is to suggest a certain internal order in society, which should be complemented with an external. In my analysis of his republicanism, federalism, and cosmopolitanism, I emphasise Kant’s dependence on stoic ideals, but also on the French revolutionist Emmanuel Sieyès. Part III, finally, is an attempt to apply Gadamer’s concept of effective history on the large varieties of readings of Perpetual Peace over time. One of the interpreters was the German philosopher Karl Vorländer, who as an ideological advisor for the German socialist party tried to concretise Kant’s ideas of perpetual peace. His view of Kant is far from the ideals in Wilhelminian Germany, as well as from the cosmopolitan ideals appearing in the 1990s. These quite different interpretations of Perpetual Peace indicate that it makes sense to use such a concept as effective history. In my discussion all these aspects are of importance.

Cosmopolitanism is a value-loaded concept that seems to become popular in intervals. The latest cosmopolitan period started after the end of the Cold War and the breakdown of the Soviet Union and concentrated mostly on aspects such as “a new world order”, and often with reference to Kant. It might be questioned if the cosmopolitan period still exists. Here it is suggested that a historical understanding of cosmopolitanism together with experience from later social and political experiences might give a new perspective on the difficulties of creating a better world in a Kantian sense, including cosmopolitan education. Considering its history and taking concern of experience Kant’s cosmopolitanism still is relevant, not least in its broader sense.

Lettevall tager i artiklen fat på næste større fase i kosmopolitismens idéhistorie – den helt uomgængelige formulering den får i oplysningstiden og specielt hos Kant; ikke mindst i hans lille, men meget vigtige værk fra 1795, Til den evige fred. Lettevall diskuterer Kants begrænsning af kosmopolitisk ret til gæstfrihed, som han formulerede i en kritik af sin samtids kolonialisme. Hun viser også i en diskussion af Kants antropologiske forelæsninger, at kosmopolitter sagtens kan være snæversynede.

This chapter offers a discussion of the relation between patriotism and cosmopolitanism in a Swedish context. It takes its starting point in the refugee situation  of 2015, where Sweden together with Germany hosted Europe’s largest number of refugees in relation to its population. The cosmopolitan right of hospitality as defined by Kant used to have a relation to patriotism, while today the two concepts no longer seem to have that relation. Swedish intellectual Ellen Key shows a way to discuss this relation that opens for an alternative way to consider patriotism.