Recognition alone does not resolve the conditions described in this series. It establishes where legitimacy may attach, but it does not determine how systems behave once recognition exists. What follows recognition is sequence.
That sequence is not arbitrary. It reflects the order in which structural stability becomes possible.
Insulation comes first.
Insulation is the condition under which refusal does not cause collapse. It is the ability to decline participation, contest assignment, or pause engagement without triggering cascading loss across unrelated domains. Insulation does not prevent consequence. It prevents consequence from compounding silently through dependency.
Where insulation is absent, participation is coerced by fragility. Refusal becomes costly. Exit becomes dangerous. Recognition without insulation remains nominal, because the human cannot practically exercise standing without risking continuity itself.
Continuity follows.
Continuity is the capacity to persist through failure. It is not success. It is not protection from loss. It is the assurance that failure does not erase the subject’s ability to remain present within the system that assigned consequence. Continuity requires that records decay, exclusions expire, and past outcomes do not harden into permanent disqualification.
The law already recognizes continuity as a structural requirement for markets, institutions, and corporate entities. When continuity is absent, risk becomes unallocable and participation collapses. For humans, continuity is frequently conditional, delayed, or unavailable until after irreparable damage has occurred.
Standing comes after insulation and continuity.
Standing governs access to adjudication. It presumes that the subject remains intact long enough to be heard and that refusal or contest does not itself destroy participation. Standing cannot operate meaningfully where insulation and continuity are absent. It becomes symbolic rather than functional.
Only after these conditions exist does legitimate participation become possible.
Participation is not inclusion. It is not access by permission. It is the ability to engage systems on terms that do not require forfeiture of continuity or submission to unbounded consequence. Participation becomes legitimate when refusal is survivable, failure is non-terminal, and standing is available before loss becomes irreversible.
This sequence is structural, not aspirational. It describes the order in which systems must recognize the human if consequence is to be assigned without asymmetry. Reversing the sequence produces familiar failures. Standing without continuity arrives too late. Continuity without insulation is fragile. Insulation without recognition is illusory.
This article does not propose how these conditions should be implemented. It does not specify institutional designs, procedural safeguards, or enforcement models. It records the order in which legitimacy becomes possible.
Human jurisdiction makes insulation intelligible. Insulation makes continuity survivable. Continuity makes standing meaningful. Standing makes participation legitimate.
The sequence cannot be compressed. It cannot be skipped. It cannot be achieved by remedy alone.
What follows is not a system. It is a trajectory.