re: Aren't we spatial?
Your second paragraph is perfectly clear and I agree, but I'm not sure I follow the first paragraph. Requiring district boundaries to follow existing political boundaries and natural features doesn't address the unequal distribution of population. You'd still have to make adjustments for that, and we're back where we started. I'm confused by the way you seem to be endorsing the status quo at the same time you're agreeing with algorithmic redistricting. I'm confused about one thing or the other, I just don't know which.