when you can drive the length of a country in a day you need more universal laws than for every 2000 people or no one knows where they stand.
Sure.
The true question is, should people living in a city at the center of a region be able to dictate the laws to the people outside the city but within the same region, just because they're technically the majority in that region? It is at the heart of
Gerrymandering, after all. Right now, EU is considering dropping the requirement for unanimous decisions, which immediately means smaller countries like Finland will be completely controlled by the largest countries like Germany, France, Italy and Spain. I don't like that either.
Thing is, I don't believe that sort of multiculturalism –– the idea that the laws and customs that one should acknowledge depends on who you are interacting with, instead of
where you both are –– will ever work. I do not know of a single example of where it has ever worked without devolving into heavy crime and violence (like the melting-pot cities of USA).
So, there are not too many options. Either you enforce a specific set of laws and thus world-view and base culture, or you let people come up with their own.
One is nicer if you travel a lot, the other is nicer if you prefer to stay put. Neither is more right than the other. I am pointing out that a layered compromise, where laws that affect more people are set in the widest context, and laws that only apply to a small locale are set at the smallest context, seems to be the path of most gain with least oppression to me.
The damning thing about the EU mandatory chat control is that it makes many aspects of discussing such things –– i.e., whenever it involves negative behaviour and "protected groups" –– illegal, and thus outside the public discussion. Which I know for sure EU "politicians" really love. I know for a fact that the majority of Finnish politicians would
absolutely love laws that forbade their decisions and actions to be publicly discussed; and that our "journalists" wouldn't complain at all as long as their opinions and publishings were also protected from discussions and comments.