>>12068417The issue is that climate laws tend to be global, meaning if something sneaks in, it fucks up everything everywhere.
Most laws don't have this property.
People in the Europe don't need to abolish the government if Argentina becomes corrupt.
If Argentina becomes corrupt, the consequences are local, and the people can look to the outside world to know that an alternative is possible.
This dynamic breaks down if laws are global.
If corruption seeps into a global system, there is no "outside".
There is nowhere to escape to, nowhere to look to for a vision of how things could be different.
There is nothing to compare system to in order to determine how bad things are.
This is why people tend to be much more critical of climate legislation than of other laws, and why globalism in general attracts criticism.
Borders are not useless relics, they function like bulkheads in a ship.
Their utility is to contain social disasters.
Imagine if multiple currencies were replaced with a single world currency, and it was mismanaged like that of Zimbabwe.
Localized currencies => Zimbabwe goes to shit => most of humanity is still fine => everyone else can help.
Global currency => entire world goes to shit => entirety of humanity is fucked => nobody can help.
