On the political front, the twentieth century witnessed two devastating World Wars, and its last three decades were marked by the outbreak of violent religious fundamentalism, ethnic and nationalist strife, nativism, backward-looking populism and tribalism. On the economic front, the rise of market fundamentalism has ushered in a new orthodoxy under which the commercialization of culture and humanistic values is now the new moral order of the postmodern era. “Greed is good” and “profit is the bottom line” seem to be the new mottos that govern the logic of our economic and cultural order. Given the resurgence of such primordial loyalties and crass commercialism, there has emerged a counternarrative that opposes both the accounts of the “clash of civilizations” and the “end of history” on the one hand, and the rise of nativist populism and backward-looking religious fundamentalism on the other. The catch word among contemporary intellectuals composing this counternarrative is cosmopolitanism. Cosmopolitanism celebrates our common humanity, extols global citizenship, questions the Western-centric view of the world and its presumed monopoly over the truth, and humanizes the non-Western Other. In so doing, it introduces a post-colonial discourse that challenges the conventional presumptions of Western political theory and assails its sacred boundaries. As such, it is a philosophic attempt to comprehend the complexities of our globalized yet fragmented world and to chart a road map to transform it. Indeed, such daring vision is necessary if we are to avoid the violence and the bloodshed of the twentieth century and push back against the voices of bigotry, extremism, and intolerance that have invaded the public sphere and, in the process, trampled our lofty ideals. Only then are we able to create a more humane society and culture.

Seen in this larger context, the learned and erudite volume by Farah Godrej is a welcome and refreshing contribution to the existing literature in comparative political theory in general and to the subject of cosmopolitanism in particular. The major strengths of the book are twofold. First, the author's discussion of cosmopolitanism, while anchored in theories of comparative political theory, transcends them and introduces new insights into the debate surrounding the subject. For example, Godrej not only attempts to “destabilize Eurocenterism,” but she also offers a new intellectual vision that is based on a synthesis of Western and Eastern thoughts and philosophies. Her critical interrogation of Western perceptions of Eastern peoples and cultures is sustained by illuminating the underlying causes of commonalities and differences that can be found across geographical divides. Second, and closely related to the previous point, the author's new synthesis is daring and thoughtful, and it is informed by the nuances of the social contexts that generate it. For example, a Eurocentric perspective of the world is supplanted by a vision of “civilizational alterity” through which a fusion of Eastern and Western thought may not only better capture the complexities of our interdependent and yet fragmented world but also may prove to be the necessary intellectual brew that can heal it. Such “border crossing,” intrinsic to cosmopolitanism, not only overcomes the binary vision of “us” versus “them”—the Western self versus the non-Western Other—but also presents a definition of the self that is confined not by geography or unassailable walls of cultural authenticity, but by the universality of the human aspirations for security, freedom, and dignity. This is the premise and the promise of cosmopolitanism and Godrej's penetrating and cogent analysis makes a strong and convincing case for it.

Particularly illuminating are the author's critiques of the Western representation of Confucian and Islamic traditions and the articulation of her own alternative narrative based on an understanding of these cultures in their own historical and social contexts, which bridges the gap between the external understanding of Western scholars and the self-perception of the scholars and peoples of the East. In contrast to the monolithic depictions of Confucianism and Islam by many Western scholars, Godrej's is sensitive to the multiplicity of voices and to the glaring contradictions within these traditions, as well as to their numerous interpretations. Unlike the authors of essentialist accounts, she recognizes that religion and culture in general and Confucianism and Islam in particular are not frozen in time and space; they are ultimately what people and their struggles make them to be. As dynamic and living entities, they evolve as a result of social change and, in the process, they transform the societies within which they evolve. In this age of communication and connections, the followers of these faiths are more conscious of other traditions, yet more self-conscious of their own unique past and present attributes. Thus they traverse the identity trains of the self and the Other constantly, crossing borders in the process in order to recreate themselves. The grasp of the subtleties of this dialectic is one of Godrej's major contributions.

Godrej provides us with an intellectual and cultural bridge, challenging the reader to embrace a different notion of the self and the Other, as well as a different way of thinking about the Other. The hope is that cosmopolitan thinkers, in respecting the self-perception of the Other without imposing their Western notions of rationality or good and evil, do not succumb to the backward-looking and nativist elements that often lurk under the garb of cultural authenticity. Ambitious in its intellectual breadth and depth, and infused with a keen grasp of the politics of our time and what they demand from engaged intellectuals who hope to make a difference in the world, this is a first-rate contribution and a passionate plea for cosmopolitanism. Students and scholars of comparative political theory will find much food for thought in this provocative, rich, and thoughtful volume.