International Migration and Kant's Cosmopolitan Right

To be a cosmopolitan today would mean accepting obligations for those who are not fellow citizens. To do so would necessarily involve recognizing the moral worth of individuals, as also discounting the effects of their nationality, religion, gender and so on over their worthiness. Although contemporary theories of cosmopolitanism trace their origin to Kant, it would be pertinent to note that Kant himself used the word ‘cosmopolitan’ in a different sense. Kant meant by cosmopolitan right, a right to hospitality or a right not to be treated with hostility. Kant argues that the host can justifiably turn away the visitor if only this could not destroy him. That is, if the visitor has fled a despotic, authoritarian regime, the host would not be justified in turning him away so long as the threat of destruction remains. What would this imply for international migration in our time? Can the host states ever claim a moral authority for controlling their borders? Are there limits to Kant’s cosmopolitan right, and if there are any, how do they reconcile with the contemporary theories of cosmopolitanism? In this paper, I will explore Kant’s theory of cosmopolitan right and its implications for international migration today.