their arguments, I have pointed to the pitfalls which risk turning cosmopolitanism into an academic endeavour with no practical and/or political effect. The result of my comparison is that cosmopolitanism, as conceptualised by feminists, may have no impact on the actual lives of womenwho suffer the consequences of either national or postcolonial violence. Therefore, it is important to think of cosmopolitism in a multi-perspectival way. I have tried to suggest one such trajectory for cosmopolitan discourses, which may yield a fresh perspective on both sides of the feminist argument. Most importantly, the multi-perspectival cosmopolitan ethos stands a better chance of embodying the social vulnerability of the world’s most deprived. This, after all, is the desired outcome of the effort to reconstruct cosmopolitan politics and its hegemonic Western reiterations.Without the alternative there can be no global equalityCronin 9(Colin, Bachelor in Political Science, Associate of a Law Firm, April 18, “The Dilemma of Cosmopolitanism and State Sovereignty,” -cosmopolitanism-and-state-sovereignty/)Imagine attempting to achieve distributive justice on a world scale under the current state system.Although the concept of distributive justice has been defined in different ways, we can consider itsfundamental principle to be a more equal allocation of rights and resources among all people in a given society (city, state, world, etc.) based on their need. Beitz’s international distributive justice stems from the ideas of states as interdependent cooperatives and the natural distribution of resources as morally arbitrary. Taken to its logical end, Beitz’s argument is that states do not have inherent entitlements to resources and that they should distribute these resources among humanity as a whole, giving more to those who need more. The problem with this principle of international distributive justice in a world of sovereign states is that it views the world in terms of humans when the main political unit is still the state. Global distributive justice conceives of world order with humans as the principal unit, but under a system of state sovereignty any “framework of international order is inhospitable” to these cosmopolitan forms of justice and morality.
FW- K=Prior QuestionDomestic focus proves the aff is committed to the nation-state as the starting point for policy analysis. We need to start with transnational cosmopolitan methods to break down nationalist frames.Beck and Sznaider 6[Ulrich Beck and Natan Sznaider, Professor of sociology at Munich's Ludwig-Maximilian University and the London School of Economics; and professor of sociology atthe Academic College of Tel-Aviv-Yaffo, Israel. “Unpacking cosmopolitanism for the social sciences: a research agenda,” The British Journal of Sociology 57.1, Wiley InterSciences." March2006Methodological nationalism takesthe following premises for granted: it equates societies with