I think the trend is that the administration is going global.

I know you think that, but neither you nor Cadell have made a cogent argument to back it up. All the examples you list are of lateral moves from one national government to another, or between national governments operating via intergovernmental treaty. Nothing listed is extragovernmental.

When it comes to food, you have global systems of production and distribution in which states play a role often overshadowed by the global agents.

...but it still needs to go into someone's mouth at some point, and that point has a latitude and a longitude.

Healthcare research, development, and testing uses increasingly global structures, and I don't think it will be too long before international healthcare providers emerge.

But they will still need to apply that research to real human beings standing on real soil in between real borders.

Companies are choosing the countries they operate out, or the exchanges on which they are listed in a increasingly casual way.

But if they operate or trade within any particular nation, they are wholly bound by the laws of that particular nation.

We have international courts with increasing jurisdictions, and international treaties and organizations that regulate resources and their use.

Key prefix: INTER not EXTRA.

The World Bank, IMF, UN, WTO, all these arose in just the last century and would have been pointless in the one before.

All but one of which governs trade, not law, and all of which are comprised of members selected via their national affiliations, not their corporate ones.

IMO the granularity of global governance is going to increase much more over the next century.

Well hang on, though - this discussion started with

the outright rejection of the current political system, and the rejuvenation of a new radical leftist movement

and

the market and the state are both non-solutions

and

Enough with politicians. They once served a function, but don't anymore. We can organise collectively using the Internet. People think this is a dream but it is not. We can design large-scale decentralized argumentation systems.

We're now at

Companies are choosing the countries they operate out, or the exchanges on which they are listed in a increasingly casual way.

So on the one hand, we've got "government by Internet." On the other hand, we've got "The Nikkei may be just as important as the Dow in a hundred years."

They're not comparable. You can't get there from here.

Thus my argument against this entire train of thought - the basis of the argument a sock gnome step 2.