Kantian Influence in the League of Nations, United Nations, and Universal Human Rights, with Related Issues

In international diplomacy, politics, and law, the idea of uniting nations under one organization marked a major shift in how people began to approach the challenge of constantly repeating conflicts. Closely linked to this idea of having an umbrella organization of nations was the development of universal human rights, which continues to serve as a key mechanism that could address injustice and inequality, and specific abuses both internationally and within individual countries. However, before the establishment of the United Nations in 1945 and its 1920 iteration, the League of Nations, there were no formal global institutions that were dedicated to resolving international disputes through peaceful means. Similarly, before the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted in 1948, the idea that everyone has rights simply because they are human was neither widely accepted nor formally recognized in international law. As some scholars have already noted, Immanuel Kant anticipated many of these ideas. In his 1795 Toward Perpetual Peace, he envisioned a “league of nations” as the basis for lasting peace. In his other writings, he argued that all individuals are entitled to rights by virtue of their capacity for reason, which grants them inherent dignity. It is therefore not surprising that some politicians and intellectuals were drawn toward his ideas. This paper will examine how Kantian political and moral concepts, which were grounded in the ability to think, contributed to the development of the League of Nations and the United Nations, which ultimately shaped the modern understanding of universal human rights. It argues that early architects of these institutions drew on Kant’s principles of reason, dignity, and lasting peace to provide a philosophical foundation capable of countering the emotional extremism that gave rise to ultranationalism and the violence of the First and Second World Wars. Yet research on this connection remains limited, and research that asserts Kant’s direct influence on the League and the UN often lacks sufficient supporting evidence. Given that political actors rarely acknowledge their theoretical influences, these connections must often be inferred through comparative analysis of policy documents and philosophical texts. Notably, as this paper will show, two leading figures in early twentieth-century international politics—South African Prime Minister Jan Smuts and U.S. President Woodrow Wilson—were strongly influenced by Kantian ideas. However, despite their contributions, both leaders upheld policies that were racially prejudicial, revealing a troubling disconnect between the realities they espoused and the new world they envisioned. Some of Kant’s writings, most likely formed by the racial attitudes of his time, also appear to conflict with his moral philosophy and were at times used to justify discrimination. As such, this paper will show that these factors—the disconnects, the League’s failure to prevent the Second World War, and the evolving socio-political understanding of international affairs—contributed to the decline in the popularity and influence of Kantian rational foundations. Still, even if Kant’s rational foundationalism is no longer acknowledged as a major influence, it continues to shape aspects of current international diplomacy and human rights discourse.