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? | MKR- (now SKY-) weighted polls and executive votes on code changes, with delegation and a governance delay; restructured under the Endgame Plan and its rulebook. | Unknown | A 28-member General Council (half elected by parish, half by national list) elects the head of government; the co-princes sanction laws with countersignature. | |
| How are conflicts resolved? | On-chain votes and forum debate; losses absorbed by minting and auctioning governance tokens; compensation decided by token votes without legal obligation. | Unknown | A four-member Constitutional Tribunal appointed by the co-princes and the General Council; ordinary courts. | |
| How are public goods funded? | A decentralised stablecoin and open-source contracts; surplus used for token buy-and-burn and rewards rather than external public goods. | Unknown | Health, education and infrastructure funded by indirect, corporate and personal taxes; parishes run local services. | |
| How is AI used? | None in governance; risk parameters are set by human votes using quantitative models. | Unknown | No specific role for AI. | |
| What are the main risks? | Concentration of voting power, low turnout, liquidation failures in market stress, reliance on centralised collateral and regulatory exposure. | Unknown | Clash between the episcopal co-prince and legislation such as abortion; exclusion of non-citizens; dependence on France, Spain and the EU. |
This illustrates differences in design; it is not a universal claim about outcomes. Each cell links to mechanisms and the claims behind them.