That reminds me of a very profound truth once uttered by General George S. Patton:

The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his.

It's also a case of people being unwilling to fight and kill to protect those people and traditions. Dying is easy for moderns who have succumbed to despair and nihilism and have given up on life. Killing your adversary–a supreme act of yes-saying to life–is another thing entirely.

Yes. One way or another, this phenomenon of rule by those who are "not us" will end- likely quite violently, if history is any guide (which it always is).

A collapse is a natural outcome once stored social capital runs out.

However we can't reignite a religion that people don't want and so we are going to have to find another way that has sufficient social acceptance to overcome some of the technological obstacles.

In the past you could count on people having sex and babies would come but birth is mostly optional for anyone with a 3 digit IQ. No portion of society other than the hedonists has managed to grok what a big change that is or how to work around it. Caveat, the Mormons and some Evangelicals have done well but both these groups have serious problems with spreading into the "West" in a broader sense

To your last point, "freest" people don't want or crave liberty. They never have. what they want is freedom to be governed by their own people and customs

The EZ example is Braveheart. Longshanks was by most historical measures a pretty capable if harsh leader . However he wasn't a Scot and that was the real root of the beef.

The EU is an obvious example but the large countries we've created are governed by people even if they are our nationals are foreigners

That has to stop.

To use the UK as an example, its small by American standards but its large enough that something akin to the old Anglo-Saxon England heptarchy would be a far better fit.