>>1862343I can understand from your point of view fracturing communities apart might seem counter intuitive. As well as supporting autonomous dichotomous cultures within the larger group may seem like a nuisance, or threatening. It may seem tempting to believe one culture is more "right" than the other, or that a certain group is entitled to command a certain area. My personal feelings are that morality in this case comes down to conflict arbitration as a means to avoid direct violence, and the optimal way to prevent human suffering while conserving individual agency.
I would challenge you to take into account the many conflicts throughout history which have occurred specifically because of forced integration vs compartmentalized collaboration:
In Ukraine it would be clearly desirable to have autonomous neutral zones instead of the current tensions, but also negotiating between external parties. With firearms it would be clearly desirable to allow different communities to govern weapons in different ways, such as more self sufficient rural areas vs highly organized cities. When it comes to medicine there is a palpable impulse of the managerial aristocracy to manage their subjects' bodies (example: COVID, abortion.) This could be negotiated by allowing it, much like firearms, to vary from community to community. The current status quo is to wage never ending culture war through institutionally controlled media networks; the type of which spoiled the #occupy movement using tactics like #gamergate and identity politics, with the goal of contradictorily homogenizing society through divide and conquer tactics.
I will address later my opinion on how to avoid conflicts over perceived human rights abuses between neighbors.
