Rejecting the authority of a monarch is very different than putting up hard borders along an arbitrary line of demarcation and reinforcing residency by birthright.

I’d say progress is progress, even if it isn’t perfect. Large scale coordination is more difficult than smaller scale stuff.

Secession, in this instance, affirms the rights of the monarch at a distance.

I can see this, but it also relives the residents that succeeded. Gives them a safer place to build infrastructure.

Obviously it didn’t work. But more because neoliberalism valued trade over civil rights and private profit over public prosperity.

Yeah that kinda stuff is my lack of optimism. If inegalitarian systems come together to decide on law for the world, then we may not get good laws.

I think there is a lot of local work to do before I am confident in a global order. If we had systems that represent us well, then combining them to set global standards would rock.

This is the principle of Constitutional governance. Power isn’t embodied in an individual, it is a social contract between all residents.

Inequality is on the rise globally, and has been for a few decades. So that social contract is being negotiated by parties on increasingly uneven ground. Therefore this statement is not calming to me. Lots of people agree to bad deals every day.

Edit: BTW thanks for sharing your views, I know I can sound kinda spicy at times when debating. We both obviously just want folks to have comfortable lives.