Search

The recent turn to cosmopolitanism in the human and social sciences is highly relevant but also challenging for national education, and in particular ethical political education. The reason is that we can no longer think of the nation as the centre of gravity for our social reality and co-existence, but also because it is hazardous to meet global challenges with a one-sided championing of the competitive edge of nations in the light of economic globalization. One real challenge is whether national education in general, and ethical political education in particular, should depart from inward nationalist views of human interconnectivity that no longer match a social reality defined by global interconnectivity. Another challenge is whether education should be used merely as an economic tool for the competitive edge of nations competing on global markets. In this chapter I propose and argue for a cosmopolitan response in national education to a metamorphosis of society triggered by globalization. I suggest that a rooted imaginary cosmopolitanism is a much needed response to global change and a real possibility in national education.

The aim of this article is to discuss recent Swedish teacher education investments and reforms, and the work of teachers in response to globalisation within the context of modern social imaginaries. I briefly outline Charles Taylor’s concept of modern social imaginaries, and I examine the character of recent Swedish teacher education, teacher education reform and the work expected of teachers. I conclude that economic imaginaries are given primacy: aims and reforms are primarily linked to economic imaginaries of the competitive nation; economic norms are given primacy in the governance of schools and education; globalised and economic standards of quality and success are increasing in importance; and the concern about how to make teacher education an attractive career investment for groups the state finds important to attract to teaching is held to be vital for the quality in outcomes of education. I critically discuss the underlying globalist imaginary I think underpins Swedish education reform in the global era, and transform the teacher into a scientifically grounded economic agent for market integration and the competitive edge of the Swedish nation. I address the question of whether the modern social imaginary of democracy and citizenship should be restored and cosmopolitised in education and teacher education and in relation to the expected work of teachers rather than be reduced to or transformed into economic worldviews and agency in the era of globalisation.

Global citizenship has been thought of as an abstract well-intended but misguided idea since citizenship is primarily held to be a legal relationship between a nation state and its members. This view needs to be reconsidered in the global era. Global interconnectivity is increasing in its scope, intensity, speed and impact, and since citizenship also includes the aspects of democratic participation, belongingness, loyalties and identity formation, our nation-centered views of citizenship are definitely challenged. In this chapter, l discuss three imaginaries of global citizenship in relation to education against the background of modern social imaginaries capturing forms of human interconnectivity in modern society. Social imaginaries are important in this context since globalization challenges not only the borders or boundaries of interconnectivity but also the ways in which we imagine ourselves to be linked together in society. The importance of education in matters of global citizenship is mainly that educational institutions can be seen as agents for helping us to imagine human interconnectedness and citizenship anew. I discuss a globalized modern imaginary of citizenship, the widespread economic globalist imaginary and, finally, a rooted cosmopolitan imaginary. I argue that the latter can inform global citizenship education in the global era but not the other two since they place the productive capacities of humans mainly in the economic sphere and shields them from democratization, and since they also seem to accelerate pressing problems that calls for global citizenship.

Cosmopolitans share the moral assumption that we have obligations and responsibilities to other people, near or distant. Today, those obligations and responsibilities are often connected with communication, but what is considered important for cosmopolitan communication differs between different thinkers. Given the centrality of communication in recent cosmopolitan theory and debate the purpose of this article is to examine assumptions about communication that are often taken for granted, and particularly the commonly held assumption that linguistic communication depends on shared or common languages. It is primarily Donald Davidson's philosophy of language that provides the framework for my examination. I argue that there are several reasons for reconstructing our understanding of the nature of language and communication, and that shared languages play a much more limited role in communication than many communication theorists, cosmopolitans and educators have imagined.