How each model solves the same problems
Instead of “democracy versus anarchism”, compare the concrete ways collective problems get solved.
| Question | + Model | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| How are decisions made? | About 60 randomly selected residents learn, deliberate and vote; recommendations with at least 80% support are treated as binding on the mayor, lower ones as advice.Sortition / citizens' assembly | Kings of small kingdoms (túatha) under over-kings; assemblies (óenach); customary law expounded by hereditary jurists rather than legislated. | |
| How are conflicts resolved? | Facilitated small groups and supermajority voting; independent coordinators choose experts; disputes over competence end with other authorities. | Brehon judges; sureties (naidm, ráth, aitire); distraint of livestock; ritual fasting against higher-ranking defendants; body-fines and honour-price compensation.Arbitration | |
| How are public goods funded? | City-funded process; outcomes direct municipal spending on flood retention, emergency help and clean-air measures. | Rules on shared grazing, co-operative ploughing, mills and fencing; obligatory hospitality; churches and monasteries; few public works. | |
| How is AI used? | No AI role. | None; a medieval legal order. | |
| What are the main risks? | Binding force rests on a mayoral promise, not law; recommendations beyond municipal powers; irregular frequency. | Status-graded and unequal protection, unfree labour, endemic raiding and dynastic war, and vulnerability to a centralising conqueror.CLM-0385 |
This illustrates differences in design; it is not a universal claim about outcomes. Each cell links to mechanisms and the claims behind them.