This paper represents an existing critique of Alexander Wendt’s theory of a ‘world state’ and invites responses to a new international theory. The argument is that Wendt’s account of the global identity formation of a ‘world state’ is paradoxical. It depicts the most authoritative agents in international politics as cyphers of a structural change that is one-sided and ultimately unifying rather than, as he implies, mutually constituted and defined by relentless struggle. This ‘agent–structure problem’ is addressed in this paper through a dialogue with Michael Oakeshott’s political philosophy. A more complex ideal type of a ‘world state’ is constructed and contrasted with Wendt’s. This frames an inquiry into the political rhetoric that drives a project of global reform between 2012 and 2022. A new theory of a ‘world state’ is elaborated with reference to: (i) the ‘foundations’ of agent-centred otherness in an international practice of the United Nations Security Council; and (ii) the structure to the moral judgements of a ‘We’. The theoretical conclusion is the logic of these events reveals the origins of a divisive conflict in an international practice which is irreconcilable with Wendt’s ‘progressive’ speculation about the uncontested future of global identity.

Jason Ralph’s On Global Learning is a powerful scholarly achievement that deserves the sustained engagement afforded leading international political theorists such as Cynthia Enloe, Friedrich Kratochwil, Nicholas Rengger, J. Ann Tickner, and RBJ Walker. This forum represents a welcome start. By way of a limited contribution, my aim is to push forward an ongoing debate with Ralph on the politics of Constructivism in IR theory. The question on the table, in short, is: What are IR Constructivism’s political and ethical commitments?

In this forum contribution, I suggest extending Jason Ralph’s pragmatic constructivism towards a more inclusive and ethically strong robust feminist-pragmatist perspective. While I value Ralph’s integration of classical pragmatism into constructivist IR theory – particularly his emphasis on lived experience and normative evaluation – I argue that his framework can be strengthened by incorporating feminist care ethics and grounded normative theory. These approaches deepen Ralph’s two evaluative tests of “inclusionary reflexivity” and “deliberative practical judgement” by foregrounding attentiveness, responsibility, competence, and responsiveness in global politics. I also critique the reliance on formal deliberative institutions and scientific expertise, urging greater recognition of informal, grassroots, and experiential knowledge.

This response focuses on three points: pragmatic constructivism and the relationship to democracy; valuation in international society and communities of practice; pragmatism and feminism.

Cosmopolitanism is usually defended on a moral basis. Because of that, it seems to be available only for political moralists. In this paper, we propose a non-moralist foundation for cosmopolitanism rooted in the metapolitical framework provided by political minimalism . This framework articulates a distinction between ethics and politics on the one hand, and between politics and metapolitics on the other. Through this lens, we argue that cosmopolitanism should be understood as a political normative position, rather than an ethical, metaethical, or metapolitical thesis. In addition, political minimalism allows us to provide a novel argument in favour of cosmopolitanism by conceptualizing the global political community in a way that avoids the utopianism often associated with other conceptions of cosmopolitanism, thereby strengthening its overall plausibility.

Can we imagine a world without hunger? This question underpins the work of this article. When the world seems plagued with conflict after conflict, from state and interpersonal violence, to environmental degradation, is there a way to imagine a reality beyond this never-ending list of harms? Food insecurity continues to increase around the world. The lack of access to food is felt by those in and out of conflict. Despite the fact that the complexity of the growth, production, distribution, and cost of food affects everyone, it is not felt the same by everyone. Food is also personal, it relates to cultural, religious, and individual circumstances, and the relationship to food is influenced by our gender, race, socioeconomic status, and dis/ability, amongst others. When problems occur that restrict access to food, international law is often seen as a mechanism for addressing these issues. However, this has not always been successful. In this article, I argue that we must take time to imagine international law differently and dream of utopias. I utilise feminist and queer approaches to rethink international law via a discussion of food insecurity. I see food as the lynchpin for both understanding international law’s limitations and reaffirming the importance of prioritising feminist methods.

In this article, we explore the crisis of the socialist imaginary and Left melancholy at the “end of history,” the utopian and ideological shifts of the past decades, the lost cultural and spiritual resources of socialism, as well as the open question of the 21st century utopias still to be invented. Examining the way in which three decades of neoliberal hegemonic struggle has remade the world and diminished socialism, we contend that the Global Financial Crisis has triggered a shift beyond neoliberal hegemony into a state of interregnum, a moment of both crisis and opportunity. Drawing on Gramsci’s emphasis on culture building and moral and intellectual leadership, Bloch’s reformulated materialism, and emergent forms of Left movements and thought today, we argue that the “end of the world” is not just a reason for despair, but also for hope, courage, and solidarity. Specifically, we suggest that the reactivation of emancipatory history might require a prophetic socialist orientation: an insistence on the possibility of another world and its prefigurative emergence, an understanding of the longer arc of struggle, and an emphasis on the spiritual inflections and beauty of the socialist dream of “an entire earth as the homeland of humanization”.

In an effort to illustrate both why and how children should be incorporated more fully into our world’s political proceedings, this article explores the utopian potential of Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Article 12 pertains to children’s “right to be heard.” More specifically, this article theorizes a radically inclusive approach to democracy described herein as a “caring,” “child-friendly” politics. This is a theory of politics that calls for children to be welcomed as equal citizens within our world’s various spaces of democracy. Accordingly, during a time beset by a complex series of overlapping, systemic global crises, this article reconsiders the possibility—a matter of hope—of allowing children to act as political equals alongside their adult counterparts. While climate change is the main international issue studied as a part of this article’s discussion of children and their agency, this piece of international political theory is ultimately about what it might mean for more radical political action to be taken to care for the world and those who will ultimately come to inherit it.

The climate crisis represents one of greatest threats to humankind, but also one of the greatest opportunities for positive social transformation. Given the many social ills that already degrade wellbeing, many people desire a more equitable, just, and livable world. Some people may believe because of climate change “we are doomed,” yet I argue this represents a misunderstanding of the situation. We have the means to curtail global warming and enhance social wellbeing through making key systemic changes. Drawing from the work of Herbert Marcuse and André Gorz, I examine the opportunity for social transformation in the face of the climate crisis and how we can envision and pursue a “better” society in terms of human flourishing and sustainability. I discuss their concept of “destructive production” and their support for work time reduction and advertising restrictions. These strategies represent key, yet overlooked, steps to help mitigate climate change and improve wellbeing.

It can take decades for a single drop of water to filter through the earth to get to an aquifer. The water in aquifers, or underground collections of water, is therefore aged. Understanding this, Indigenous peoples in the Pacific have long been active in safeguarding these deep waters, knowing that our futures are determined by what is beneath us. This is demonstrated in various Pacific and Indigenous-led movements to protect water, including the movement to protect Mauna Kea, a mountain in Hawaiʻi and the proposed site of the controversial Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT). This article will explore the movement to prevent the construction of the TMT, as well as other connected movements in the Pacific, as acts of futurity. While many analyses of this and other movements focus on what happens on land, this article will focus on the aquifers beneath us, arguing that the efforts to prevent construction, destruction, and devastation represent the ways Hawaiian, Pacific, and other Indigenous peoples not only dream of better futures but create them in the present, maintaining an ancestral sense of radical hope in the deep waters that have fed, and will continue to feed, generations.