I've often wondered why I'm subject to the higher taxes of social democrats, while also forced to obey the restricted individual rights of conservative republicans. It is the product of a forced convergence of basic rights, local law, and philosophical/behavioral legislation which I believe can be decoupled.
Dynamic political societies are but one way that people can subject local governance to the forces of competition. If all government authority were no longer bound to a geography, new forms of cultural gravity could emerge. Esoteric systems that manage millions or billions of people could be segmented, and broken down into autonomous communities.
The size and scope of social agencies would vary from hyper local to global. For this fictional architecture to have a chance at working, it is imperative that basic freedoms be global*. These cornerstones of liberty would be worded in such as way as to restrict the rights of organizations, local and philosophical governments. They would serve as a common interface for governments world wide, and safe guard individual rights against local abuse. Creating new world laws, would require a global vote. To counter rapid bureaucratic growth, periodic pruning would reduce unnecessary or outdated legislation. The nuances of changing politics could then be broken down by local gov and then further by philosophical and belief based systems.
Take for example two philosophically orthogonal but physically adjacent communities. One is a collaborative society which embraces diverse perspectives under a liberal set of laws (hippies). At the same time their physical neighbors are extremely individualistic with a highly structured and strict behavioral legislation (keep your lawns mowed!). Self organization would enable lifestyles consistent with the people's interests and behavior. It should come as little surprise that we already have this form of hyper local government in the form of neighborhood rules. It's beneficial for diverse social groups to learn to live together, while respecting each other's space. What happens when a local community embraces a new social standard, i.e. communal hippies become individualist lawn mowers? Where do the rights of the individual meet the rights of the community?
Local disputes would be handled non-violently by cultural groups that thread between regions, and are elevated to global arbitration only when necessary. There's a reason why stable ancient societies were governed by wise elders. The stability of fundamental social functions - food, housing, transport, are not to be sacrificed lightly by current political whim. Reduced social friction is an ongoing design advantage for local interactive governments.
The effect would be one global nation comprised of thousands of local communities. Weaved throughout the world would be nearly unlimited philosophically determined, self sustaining, net governments. Essentially there would be a three tiered world government: global, local, and philosophy/belief based networks with increasing complexity. It's easier for people to swap belief based governments than to move about the world. Simpler top level structures support this reality.
Notes:
*= basic freedoms: life, mobility, pizza