Intercultural Political Theory, Globalization, and Democratic Agency: A Pragmatic View
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper argues that there is an internal link between three things: globalization, the future of democracy, and the academic field of comparative or intercultural political theory. These themes are linked through the idea that addressing the human-scale problems characteristic of intensive processes of globalization can take a genuinely democratic form only under conditions where it is possible for citizens around the world to form shared political imaginaries in which they see themselves not only as connected to one another but also as possessing the ethical responsibility and the agent-capacity to render these processes responsive to those whom they affect. Since the formation of imagined communities of shared fate is linguistically mediated, people who seek to assert democratic agency over global problems need ideational resources that resonate with locally embedded understandings of ethics and politics in order for mutual interdependence and affectedness to generate ways to “imagine the world differently” (to borrow the slogan of the World Social Forum). We highlight the contributions of comparative political theory to the common pool of ideational resources from which political actors can draw in discovering the languages through which to construct new, democracy-enabling, political imaginaries. Drawing on theoretical accounts of the pragmatics of language use, we have suggested that comparative political theory can help to render articulate and explicit an array of ideas about politics which, when taken up by political actors, can help to motivate citizens to take responsibility for rendering the processes of globalization more responsive to demands for democratic accountability. Finally, we argue that advancing work in comparative political theory is an institutional as well as an intellectual challenge, and describe one collaborative project animated by this supposition.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".