The Territorial State in Cosmopolitan Justice

Cosmopolitans attack the idea of the territorial state as, at best, a hold over from another era, and, at worst, an affront to justice. From a cosmo politan perspective the state has two fatal flaws: it is the refuge of scoun drels, such as dictators, illiberal or authoritarian cultures, or patriarchs; and it is powerless or counterproductive as an engine of justice in the increasingly globalized world. States serve important purposes. Until recently, states and sub-state jurisdictions have been the only effective sites of democratic delibera tion, contestation, or revolt. States remain the only political jurisdictions capable of, or charged with, enforcing the rights and equality of all per sons. States have been far from reliable in these areas, but they are nonetheless more reliable than any other level of government. Recent work in political philosophy, however, suggests that in stitutions may be superior to states in promoting these aims. According to writers such as Thomas Pogge, James Bohman, and others, only cos mopolitan institutional forms can deliver political equality, justice, and democracy on a global scale. This paper offers a new argument for the territorial state, based on the preconditions for democratic control over patterns of land use. It then argues that cosmopolitan institutions cannot support the same goal— worse, they actively undermine it. For states can, but cosmopolitanism cannot, respect two essential parts of democracy: the right to exclude those who ought not to have a say, and the right of communities to determine their own patterns of land use. Persons and communities use land in any number of ways, but their patterns of use are structured in both form and content by the prevailing economic and legal systems, as well as less-formalized norms and ends. Territorial denotes the right and responsibility of a certain level of government to regulate individual and collective uses of land (including territorial waters and air space) within an area. I refer to the area controlled as the scope of territorial jurisdiction, and the particular functions as the realm. The realm of territorial jurisdiction may include