This essay explores unterritorial democracy and pan-citizenship, suggesting new frameworks for global governance.
The COVID-19 pandemic exposed the fragility and adaptability of democratic orders. While confinement accelerated cross-border ‘tele-life’, rights and protections remained territorially locked. This essay argues that democracy need not be tied to the Westphalian state: it can be re-imagined as unterritorial democracy – voluntary, overlapping and portable communities of belonging. Building on panarchist thought, Austro-Marxist proposals for non-territorial autonomy and Jewish Bundist experiments with cultural self-rule, I advance a model of pan-citizenship and polycentric governance in which rights and representation follow persons rather than places. The contribution is threefold: (1) a genealogy that situates unterritorial democracy within longer traditions of political imagination; (2) analytical criteria – membership portability, competence clarity, equity and accountability – that render such institutions evaluable; and (3) contemporary proto-examples – from diaspora voting to indigenous electoral registers – showing that elements of unterritorial democracy already exist. By integrating historical, analytical and empirical strands – and by engaging debates on emergency powers and derogations of rights – the essay positions unterritorial democracy as a normative horizon for global constitutionalism, inviting person-linked indicators capable of capturing democratic belonging within a framework of multiterritorial pluralism. In this way, the essay contributes to both the normative debates and the methodological agenda of global constitutionalism.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
David Altman (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: