Is the Neo-Cameral Patchwork Really a Monarchy

Then I think it will happen fairly soon possibly.

But it... I think the point is, I think he is much more liberal, uh, than he admits to being, and, and that's a good thing from my point of view.

And I don't think this monarchy stuff is, like, actually very real.

Like, his, his model of a, of a patchwork neo-cameral state is not in any serious way a monarchy.

It's like it's owned by its sovereign stockholders who then appoint a CEO as an executive appointment to, uh, to carry out the will of the board.

So the sovereignty in... There, there's two levels of sovereignty there.

The f- the CEO is not a level of sovereignty at all.

The CEO is just an executive appointment.

The, the board is sovereign over the CEO, and then maybe even more importantly, the patchwork with all its Darwinian dynamics is ultimately sovereign over the patch, over the local neo-cameral state because, you know, it's subject to this Darwinian discipline within this multiplicitous system which m- which restrains it.

Um, and so, yes, I mean, that, my- that's my main line of en- engagement would be just, like, come on, just admit you're a liberal and admit you're not a monarchist