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? | Token-weighted executable and social proposals, with delegation; working groups run by three elected stewards; constitutional amendments need two-thirds and 1% participation. | Kings of small kingdoms (túatha) under over-kings; assemblies (óenach); customary law expounded by hereditary jurists rather than legislated. | |
| How are conflicts resolved? | Constitutional limits on majorities; dissolution votes freeze working-group funds; a 4-of-8 Security Council can cancel malicious proposals. | 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? | Registration fees fund ENS development first and other public goods second, including a Public Goods working group. | Rules on shared grazing, co-operative ploughing, mills and fencing; obligatory hospitality; churches and monasteries; few public works. | |
| How is AI used? | None in governance. | None; a medieval legal order. | |
| What are the main risks? | Governance capture through low turnout, reliance on a few delegates and stewards, and temporary trust in the Security Council. | 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.