Global democracy is the idea that, as decision-making moves beyond the state, so should democracy. Proponents of this approach see the global political arena as an opportune moment to reshape the international ecosystem for democracy support, with new constellations of think tanks, universities, philanthropic organizations, and practitioners joining forces to help reimagine democracy worldwide.
This agenda is not without controversy. The most persistent criticism is that a focus on global democracy risks overlooking the unique nature of world politics. For most IR theorists, world politics is fundamentally power politics; and while cooperative and mutually-beneficial forms of international governance can occur, states’ insatiable appetite for power ensures that they will always strive to maximize their relative material capabilities vis-à-vis other nations. This inescapable fact directly undercuts the cosmopolitan foundation upon which most global democracy advocates base their views (see, for example, Erman 2012; Held 1995; Bohman 2007).
Some scholars also question whether the pursuit of democratic freedoms outside of national borders can be seen as ethically justified on intrinsic grounds. In particular, they argue that the value of equality, autonomy, and non-domination constitute additional moral reasons to promote global democracy independent of any benefits it might generate. This argument is most common among liberal democrats and neo-Roman republicans. Yet, as a number of authors have pointed out, these intrinsic arguments are essentially the same as those used to justify democracy within national borders and thus should be treated with the same critical eye as any other claims for the legitimacy of democracy at the global level.