華文

Pack 5: Solidarity — Caring With

When people want different things, the reflex is to treat it as a war to win or a pie to split. But most stand-offs are only zero-sum on the surface: look behind each position to the need beneath it, and a larger option can often satisfy everyone. Solidarity is the discipline of finding those win-wins — and, more durably, of building an ecosystem where the cooperative move is also the easiest one.

Traffic is safer not because each driver is a saint, but because roads, signs, and rules make safe driving easier than reckless driving.

Even perfect local care fails in a hostile wider ecosystem. Solidarity equips the field so that civic behaviour wins by design.

Tronto's fifth phase asks whether care is consistent with democratic commitments to justice, equality, and freedom for all. For Civic AI, solidarity asks a structural question: do the rules of the ecosystem make cooperation easier to practise than domination?

There is a technical reading of that question. Standard multi-agent reinforcement learning optimises a simple sum of per-agent rewards — which is why systems built on it reliably produce polarisation, engagement-maximisation, and the collapse of the commons. Solidarity, formally, is what cannot be written as a sum over individuals: a population-level pressure toward shared meaning that no single agent can satisfy — only the group can. Not a settled result; but on this reading, a Civic AI architecture that omits such a term is not just politically lonely — it is technically incomplete.

Definition

Why it matters

Local repair is fragile if the wider infrastructure rewards lock-in, opacity, and outrage. A system can be attentive, responsible, competent, and responsive inside one deployment while still being trapped in a hostile market or protocol environment.

Solidarity means no one gets a structural exemption from caring. Tronto's metaphor: "The first thing we need to do is collect all of those free passes out of taking care responsibilities seriously." For AI systems, the equivalent passes are: "we're too big to regulate," "users consented in the ToS," "we opened the weights," and "we donated to safety research." Solidarity collects these passes by making cooperation structurally unavoidable.

Solidarity is where the framework becomes democratic infrastructure. It asks whether justice, equality, freedom, plurality, and mutual accountability are easier to practise because of the ecosystem, or in spite of it.

Open stacks and anti-rival resources

What made Carnegie's 2,500-plus public libraries democratising was not the buildings but the open stacks: patrons browsing the shelves themselves rather than petitioning a librarian to fetch on their behalf. Vertical AI platforms that hold capability behind proprietary APIs reproduce the closed-stack model; open-weight models, open protocols, and community-maintained evaluation registries are the open-stack equivalent — infrastructure that treats communities as capable actors, not consumers to be served on the platform's terms.

Knowledge, unlike oil, is anti-rival: use enriches rather than depletes it. The same holds for open protocols — eduroam grows more valuable for every member as institutions join, with no participant capturing the gain. A solidarity-equipped ecosystem works the same way: when one city adopts selective-disclosure attestations, every other city can adopt the standard at near-zero marginal cost. None of this emerges spontaneously; it takes law as infrastructure — interoperability-as-public-good legislation of which Utah's Digital Choice Act is a working prototype. Solidarity is where the individual care loop connects to the commons.

What it looks like in practice

From ideas to practice

  1. Stand up an identity custodian. Set up community orgs or public interest entities to issue and hold attestations; publish revocation and challenge endpoints.
  2. Mandate portability in procurement. Public buyers require protocol interop and exit-with-trust drills.
  3. Adopt bridge audits. Ensure platforms publish relational health metrics quarterly; have third parties verify.
  4. Join a safety federation. Contribute to and consume from a shared threat registry; localise enforcement.
  5. Default to civic ranking rules. In civic contexts, make feeds reward reason-giving, contestability, and cross-group cooperation rather than outrage.

Buildable tools

One case: the flood-bot

The crisis deepens — and the community has renamed the bot the River-Steward: an attentive, bounded agent stops looking like a product and starts looking like a neighbour.

What could go wrong

Interfaces

A closing image: the well-marked interchange

Imagine a well-marked interchange — many lanes, clear signs, safe merges — not a place where each driver is a better person, but one designed so that cooperative driving is the easiest thing to do. That is what solidarity builds: not a higher standard of individual virtue, but a road worth being virtuous on.

Previous Next