Sure but in the instance of colonialism and slavery, it's egregious to us, and of course we are right to be outraged. Certain old red tories might still see it as a necessary (civilising) evil. The problem with morality is it is a war in a very real sense, hence cannot be universal in any other sense than ontological. There is absolutely a forced coercion element to morality, call it dictatorial if you will.
Kant's weekness is he is trapped in the analytic/synthetic dichotomy, I.E: between definitionally true statements and those which require verification. So in that sense like Hegel, he rests his edifice on consciousness and the consciousness of the self. This is still far too vague and metaphysical... I.E: it's not interesting how we cognise knowledge
but how the knowledge is developed and cognised itself, which Kant struggles to answer.
What interests me about morality is how people in any given moment in time are forced to adhere to it, as a power above themselves. Which is why I think Thomas Hobbes is the most important political thinker before Marx, even if his conception of sovereignty runs diametrically opposite to the free development of each being the free development of all.
