How each model solves the same problems
Instead of “democracy versus anarchism”, compare the concrete ways collective problems get solved.
| Question | ✕ | ✕ | ✕ | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| How are decisions made? | Token-weighted executable and social proposals, with delegation; working groups run by three elected stewards; constitutional amendments need two-thirds and 1% participation. | Unknown | Each listed body sets its own well-being objectives and steps; the Welsh Ministers publish national indicators and a future trends report after each election. | |
| How are conflicts resolved? | Constitutional limits on majorities; dissolution votes freeze working-group funds; a 4-of-8 Security Council can cancel malicious proposals. | Unknown | The Commissioner may review a body and recommend; the body must take reasonable steps to follow or publish reasons (s 22). The Auditor General examines application of the principle. | |
| How are public goods funded? | Registration fees fund ENS development first and other public goods second, including a Public Goods working group. | Unknown | Covers the Welsh Ministers, local authorities, health boards, national park authorities and other listed bodies; public services boards plan locally. | |
| How is AI used? | None in governance. | Unknown | No documented AI role. | |
| What are the main risks? | Governance capture through low turnout, reliance on a few delegates and stewards, and temporary trust in the Security Council. | Unknown | Soft 'follow or explain' enforcement; procedural compliance; difficulty measuring long-term and preventative benefits. |
This illustrates differences in design; it is not a universal claim about outcomes. Each cell links to mechanisms and the claims behind them.