You seem to be reaching a very violent conclusion.
Discussion
I don't want it, but it seems where things are heading. I'm just being the weatherman.
Also, small societies tend to be very considerate of the other members. They are more forgiving and understanding. The leaders know more of the individuals and therefore care about their wellbeing. The larger a country/government gets, the less consideration of individuals and the less freedom. Many smaller nations would prevent the global meddling that the US is currently guilty of committing. It would put people together with those that had at least complementary beliefs. It would reduce the stealing from one group to give to another. All of that is good and peaceful and would be better than what we have.
On the other hand, we have reality. There are too many people who would not allow a peaceful transition, so I am not currently advocating for a split. There is no reason a peaceful split can't be done other than tyrants don't want to let anyone leave their sphere of control.
I have been wondering this, myself. Every system is corrupt. Staying in that system means we succumb to the corruption and theft. Creating a new one, even locally, will likely invite force from actors within the old system who think you belong there.
How else are you supposed to stop them if you don't want to play with them?
Build something better?
Yes it is a conundrum. I no longer believe that we can fix things from the inside, but a split would guarantee violence that I don't want, so I wait.
I think there is a decent chance, that sometime in the relatively near future, the US gets knocked from its pedestal militarily and economically. If they don't have the money to buy armies and arms, it may be possible to just walk away at that time, but that too will be very hard and unpleasant. We seem to have a bunch of bad choices and have to find the least bad.
What I was getting as is that when you try to build something better, they try to force you back into their system.