The plain fact is that the notion of "consent of the governed" is preposterous in any culturally diverse environment of more than a few million people.
Reasonable people wish to live differently, with different forms and amounts of government, religion, social norms, etc. So be it.
Why place the arbitrary line around a few million? It never made much sense to me to apply it to anything more than an individual.
The unfortunate reality is that, as social animals, other peoples behavior has a dramatic effect on us. Since I have met many people of good will who wish to live in dramatically different social configurations, my best solution is lots of small countries with varying social configurations.
Just trust me on this: there are people, good people, who don't think like you do. I think more like you than probably 95% of the people out there, and I might even want to live in the country that you and people with a like mind establish. But I'd have to see how it turned out, and I'd like to have the option to bail if it ends up not being my cup of tea.
The social environment that they live in matters intensely to a large subset of humans. That's OK, even if you aren't one of them. We have enough room on this huge continent for their kind and your kind, and even my kind.
Otherwise these 6 new countries would soon be just as diverse as California is now.
It's crazy talk, I know.
Massive super-states: bulwarks of peace, clean living and respect for both the individual and their local cultural groups... Sure, man. Whatever.
At least give it a chance in your brain: I know it doesn't fit the classic left/right divide, but would a continent of Switzerlands of varying cultures be that bad? Worse than todays USG?
>>The series focuses on the antics of a family who live in a poor valley community and, as a result of pollution and radiation exposure, are all disabled or deformed. The pollution is the direct result of the lavish lifestyle of the rich community known as "The Hills", whose residents exploit and harm the valley residents with absolutely no regard for their safety or well-being.
Social commentary
Many reviewers and fans see the series as a commentary on social stratification. While the residents of the Hills live in wealth and economically dominate those in the Valley, there is no rallying cry for wealth redistribution or fairer working conditions.
NONE of these nations would be bullies... because they would be unable to defend themselves. They would rely on some bigger, stronger ally to guarantee that other nations would not trample their sovereignty or, most importantly, their property rights.
I DO think that a bigger, stronger nation would dominate in the area that would be formerly known as California... I just don't think that stronger nation would be one of the new nations formed.
It would probably be the US actually.
So the rich of the new nations would not dominate the poor of the new nations...
It's far more likely that the US would dominate both.
But there is still the issue of elites (remote or otherwise) imposing diversity on their citizens against their wishes. If this hadn't happened in the US, California wouldn't be so diverse in the first place.
You claim this is not such a problem with small countries, but exactly the same thing is happening in Europe.
Federalism and the incorporation doctrine have been a powerful force for freedom and justice in the USA. Please let's not abandon it.
I hope you're including immigration from the Midwest, the South, the tons of immigration from the East Coast etc. in the immigration you want to restrict.
California used to be part of Mexico, so nothing from that border could be making California any more diverse.
1821-1846 is 25 years.
Time was, California only had indigenous peoples.