Barışın Ötesinde: Bir Özgürlük Felsefesi olarak Kant’ın Kozmopolitanizmi

Öz

Kant’ın siyaset felsefesinin en bilinen ve üzerinde en fazla durulan bileşenlerinden biri olma özelliği taşıyan kozmopolitanzim tartışmasını, bir devletlerarası ilişkiler meselesi veya kalıcı barış inşa etme projesi olarak ele alma eğilimi yaygındır. Bu çalışma, Kant’ın kozmopolitanizmini barış kavramının ötesine taşıyarak bir ‘özgürlük felsefesi’ olarak sunmayı amaçlamakta ve Kant’ın titizlikle oluşturduğu kozmopolitan bakış açısının derinlikli yapısının, pekâlâ süregelen adaletsizliklerin devamını sağlayabilecek güvenlikçi bir bakış açısını meşrulaştırmak yerine ahlak felsefesinde temellenen bireysel özgürlüğü odağına yerleştirdiğini iddia etmektedir. Bu bakımdan düşünürün kozmopolitan siyaset teorisi, barışın ve cumhuriyetin önemini yadsımaksızın insanlığın özgürlük kapasitesinin giderek mükemmelleşeceği bir geleceğin imkanlarını aramaya yönelmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Immanuel Kant
• Kozmopolitanizm
• Özgürlük
• Barış
• Cumhuriyet

Beyond Peace: Kant's Cosmopolitanism as a ‘Philosophy Of Freedom’

Öz

The discourse on cosmopolitanism, a prominent and extensively examined component of Kant's political philosophy, is frequently interpreted as a matter of international relations or as a project aimed at establishing perpetual peace. This study seeks to transcend the conventional focus on peace by presenting Kant’s cosmopolitanism as a 'philosophy of freedom.' It posits that the intricate and multi-dimensional structure of Kant's carefully developed cosmopolitan perspective prioritizes individual freedom rooted in moral philosophy, rather than endorsing a security-oriented viewpoint that could perpetuate existing injustices. In this context, Kant's cosmopolitan political theory, while acknowledging the importance of peace and republicanism, is oriented towards exploring the potential for a future in which humanity's capacity for freedom is progressively realized.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Immanuel Kant
• Cosmopolitanism
• Freedom
• Peace
• Republic

Kaynakça

1. Archibugi, D. (1995). Immanuel Kant, Cosmopolitan Law and Peace. European Journal of International Relations, 1(4), 429-456.
2. Arendt, H. (2014). Totalitarizmin Kaynakları 2: Emperyalizm (çev. B. S. Şener). İstanbul: İletişim.
3. Başkır, Ü. D. (2021). ‘Kozmopolitanizmin İçkin Gerilimi’: Politikanın Çağdaş Krizini Kavram Tarihi Işığında Düşünmek. Mülkiye, 45 (1), 33-60.
4. Behnke, A. (2008). Eternal Peace as the Graveyard of the Political: A Critique of Kant’s Zum Ewigen Frieden. Millennium - Journal of International Studies, 36(3), 513-531.
5. Benhabib, S. (2004). The Rights of Others: Aliens, Residents and Citizens. New York: Cambridge University Press.
6. Benhabib, S. (2012). Carl Schmitt's Critique of Kant: Sovereignty and International Law. Political Theory, 40(6), 688-713.
7. Berlin, I. (2008). Tilki ile Kirpi: Seçme Makaleler, trans. M. Tunçay & Z. Mertoğlu, İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.
8. Bielefeld, H. (1997). Autonomy and Republicanism: Immanuel Kant’s Philosopy of Freedom. Political Theory, 25(4), 524-558.

9. Brown, G. W. (2009). Grounding Cosmopolitanism: From Kant to the Idea of a Cosmopolitan Constitution. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
10. Browning, G. (2011). Global Theory from Kant to Hardt and Negri. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
11. Byrd, B. S. & Hruschka, J. (2012). Kant’s Doctrine of Right, London: Cambridge University Press.
12. Cavallar, G. (1999). Kant and the Theory and Practice of International Right. Cardiff: University of Wales Press.
13. Cavallar, G. (2008). Vitoria, Grotius, Pufendorf, Wolff and Vattel: Accomplices of European Colonialism and Exploitation or True Cosmopolitanism? Journal of the History of International Law, 10, 181-209.
14. Cortright, D. (2008). Peace: A History of Movements and Ideas. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
15. Covell, C. (1998). Kant and the Law of Peace: A Study in the Philosophy of International Law and International Relations. Londra: Palgrave MacMillan.
16. Çoban Oran, F., & Pekcan, C. (2017). Uluslararası İlişkiler Düşüncesinde “Dünya Barışı”: Immanuel Kant ve Zhao Tingyang Felsefesi Üzerine Bir Karşılaştırma. Uluslararası İlişkiler, 14(55), 3-18.
17. Çörekçioğlu, H. (ed.) (2010). Kant Felsefesinin Politik Evreni, İstanbul: Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.
18. Danilovic, V. & Clare J. (2007). The Kantian Liberal Peace (Revisited). American Journal of Political Science, 51(2), 397–414.
19. Doyle, M. W. (1983). Kant, Liberal Legacies, and International Relations. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 12(3), 323-353.
20. Doyle, M. W. (2005). Three Pillars of the Liberal Peace. American Political Science Review, 99(3), 463–66.
21. Duva, Ö. (2022). Modernliğin Krizine Bir Çözüm Denemesi Olarak Kozmopolitanizm: Foedus Amphictyonum ve Dünya Yurttaşlığı. Bilgi Dergisi, 24(1), 268-293.
22. Ellis, E. (2012). Introduction in Kant’s Political Theory: Interpretations and Applications, Edited by E. Ellis, University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 1-23.
23. Ferguson, M. (2012). Unsocial Sociability: Perpetual Antagonism in Kant’s Political Thought in Kant’s Political Theory: Interpretations and Applications, Edited by E. Ellis, University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 150-169.
24. Flikschuh, K. (2000). Kant and Modern Political Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
25. Geuss, R. (2019). A Republic of Discussion: Habermas at Ninety. The Point Magazine. https://thepointmag.com/politics/a-republic-of-discussion-habermas-at-ninety/ (Date of Access: 02.05.2024).
26. Gat, A. (2005). The Democratic Peace Theory Reframed: The Impact of Modernity. World Politics, 58, 73-100.
27. Guyer, P. (2016). Virtues of Freedom: Selected Essays on Kant, London: Oxford University Press.
28. Habermas, J. (2002). Öteki Olmak Ötekiyle Yaşamak: Siyaset Felsefesi Yazıları, trans. Ü. Oskay, İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları.
29. Habermas, J. (2008). The Constitutionalization of International Law and the Legitimation Problems of a Constitution for World Society. Constellations, 15(4), 444-455.
30. Haggenmacher, P. (2005). Vitoria’dan Vattel’e Uluslararası Hukuk Kişisi olarak Egemen Devlet in Devlet Kuramı Edited by İ. Selçuk & C. B. Akal, Ankara: Dost, 257-265.
31. Heller, A. (2010). Kant’ın Politika Felsefesinde Özgürlük ve Mutluluk in Kant Felsefesinin Politik Evreni Edited by H. Çörekçioğlu, İstanbul: Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları, 171-187.
32. Honig, B. (1993). Political Theory and the Displacement of Politics, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
33. Höffe, O. (2002). Categorical Principles of Law, trans. M. Migotti. Philadelphia: Pennsylvania University Press.
34. Höffe, O. (2006). Kant’s Theory of Cosmopolitan Law and Peace, trans. A. Newton, New York: Cambridge University Press.
35. Hunter, I. (2012). Kant’s Political Thought in the Prussian Enlightenment. in Kant’s Political Theory: Interpretations and Applications Edited by E. Ellis, University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 170-207.
36. Hüseyinzadegan, D. (2022). Kant’ın İdeal Olmayan Siyaset Teorisini Konumlandırmak: Sistematik Bir Yaklaşım. Politikos, 53-67.
37. Jaspers, K. (1962). Kant, trans. R. Manheim. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace & Company.
38. Kant, I. (1996). The Metaphysics of Morals, trans. M. Gregor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
39. Kant, I. (1997). The Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, trans. M. Gregor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
40. Kant, I. (2002). Ahlâk Metafiziğinin Temellendirilmesi, trans. İ. Kuçuradi. Ankara: Türkiye Felsefe Kurumu.
41. Kant, I. (2006). Dünya Yurttaşlığı Amacına Yönelik Genel Bir Tarih Düşüncesi, trans. U. Nutku, in Tarih Felsefesi: Seçme Metinler Edited by D. Özlem & G. Ateşoğlu, Ankara: Doğu Batı Yay., 30-47.
42. Kant, I. (2007). Political Writings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
43. Kant, I. (2010). Yaygın bir Söz Üstüne: ‘Teoride Doğru Olabilir, Ama Pratikte İşe Yaramaz’ [Teori ve Pratik] in Kant Felsefesinin Politik Evreni Edited by H. Çörekçioğlu, İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları, 19-49.
44. Karagöz Yeke, Y. (2016). Kant’ın Felsefesinde Ebedi Barış Düşüncesinin Güncelliği Üzerine. Beytulhikme: An International Journal of Philosophy, 6(1), 141-175.
45. Kersting, W. (1992). Politics, Freedom, and Order: Kant’s Political Philosophy in Cambridge Companion to Kant Edited by P. Guyer, New York: Cambridge University Press 342-366.
46. Kleingeld, P. (1999). Kant, History and the Idea of Moral Development. History of Philosophy Quarterly, 16(1), 59-81.
47. Kleingeld, P. (2001). Nature or Providence? On the Theoretical and Moral Importance of Kant’s Philosophy of History. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly, 75(2), 201-220.
48. Korsgaard, C. M. (1996). Creating the Kingdom of Ends. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
49. Levitsky, S. & Way, L. A. (2002). The Rise of Competitive Authoritarianism. Journal of Democracy, 13(2), 51–65.
50. Lutz-Bachmann, M. (1997). Kant’s Idea of Peace and Philosophical Conception of a World Republic in Perpetual Peace: Essays on Kant’s Cosmopolitan Ideal Edited by J. Bohman & M. Lutz-Bachmann, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 59-78.
51. Maliks, R. (2009). Prussian polis: Kant's democratic republicanism. Philosophy and Social Criticism, 35(4), 427-445.
52. Marx, K. (1979). Grundrisse: Ekonomi Politiğin Eleştirisi İçin Ön Çalışma, trans. S. Nişanyan, İstanbul: Birikim.
53. McCarthy, T. (1999). On Reconciling Cosmopolitan Unity and National Diversity. Public Culture, 11(1), 175-208.
54. Mertens, T. (1996). Cosmopolitanism and Citizenship: Kant Against Habermas. European Journal of Philosophy, 4(3), 328-347.
55. Neoclous, M. (2013). Barışçıllaştırma Rüyası: Birikim, Sınıf Savaşı ve Av, trans. A. Aydın. AyrıntıDergi, 1, 52-62.
56. O’Neill, O. (2012). Kant and the Social Contract Tradition in Kant’s Political Theory: Interpretations and Applications Edited by E. Ellis, University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 25-41.
57. Ökten, K. H. (2006). Kant’ta Barışın Yazgısallığı in Barışın Felsefesi: 200. Ölüm Yıldönümünde Kant Edited by İ. Kuçuradi, Ankara: Türkiye Felsefe Kurumu Yayınları, 119-139.
58. Placek, K. (2012). The Democratic Peace Theory. E-International Relations. https://www.e-ir.info/2012/02/18/the-democratic-peace-theory/ (Date of Access: 27.09.2024).
59. Powell, B. K. (2006). Kant and Kantians on “the Normative Question”. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 9(5), 535-544.
60. Reiss, H. (2007). Introduction in Kant: Political Writings Edited by H. Reiss, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1-40.
61. Riley, P. (1973). The Origins of Federal Theory in International Relations Ideas. Polity, 6(1), 87-121.
62. Riley, P. (1982). Will and Political Legitimacy: A Critical Exposition of Social Contract Theory in Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, Kant, and Hegel. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
63. Ripstein, A. (2009). Force and Freedom: Kant’s Legal and Political Philosophy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
64. Russet, B. (1993). Grasping the democratic peace : principles for a post–Cold War world. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
65. Schmitt, C. (2006). The Nomos of the Earth in the International Law of the Jus Publicum Europaeum, trans. G. L. Ulmen, New York, NY: Telos Press.
66. Sezer, D. & Başkır, Ü. D. (2022). Amerikan Federalistleri, Hannah Arendt ve Cumhuriyetçilik: Temsili Demokrasiye Karşı Konsey Sistemi?. Felsefi Düşün, 19, 420-457.
67. Simmel, G. (2007). Kant and Goethe: On the Modern History of Weltanschauung. Theory, Culture and Society, 24(6), 159-191.
68. Simpson, S. (2019). Making liberal use of Kant? Democratic peace theory and Perpetual Peace. International Relations, 33(1), 109-128.
69. Waldron, J. (2000). What is cosmopolitan? Journal of Political Philosophy, 8(2), 227–243.
70. Weart, S. R. (1998). Never at War: Why Democracies Will Not Fight One Another. New Haven, MA: Yale University Press.
71. Wood, A. W. (1998). Kant’s Project for Perpetual Peace in Cosmopolitics: Thinking and Feeling beyond the Nation Edited by P. Cheah & B. Robbins, London: University of Minnesota Press, 59-76.
72. Zakaria, F. (1997). The Rise of Illiberal Democracy. Foreign Affairs, 76(6), 22–43.