A phrase from Pezer in another context turned on a light, produced this thought: I'll answer to a government of muses only.
Man will not be read yo be governed as a whole, except if its governers are worthy of the devotion of philosophers.
Since any form this sort of planning will take over time must include the most radical disagreements as well as many accidental absurdities, I will throw this out here as such; the worthy must govern, and the worthy are those who are loved by the most comprehensive valuing.
Perhaps a world ruled in name and formality, ritual and color by tempestuous beauties, and in accordance with their tastes and whims, organized by men of will and poetry. A few fixed laws; habeas corpus of course, thus no state sanctioned butchery of humans or elaborate prison systems. A necessity is animal (not horrendously human) treatment of animal foods - freedom of expression, but accountability for words. No muse would tolerate otherwise.
A seemingly radically different proposal;
Democracy is simply the workings of leverage in an age of letters. Democracy is about finding a commonly acceptable narrative. Tyranny is imposing a narrative whether it's acceptable or not; it changes its subjects in ways they may not want (nature is tyrannical) - Democracy is founded on the notion that subjects want to change, and will change one another in favorable ways, if they aren't hindered (culture is 'democratic').
A few months ago Pezer proposed a way to implement a new governing structure from available means without creating a bureaucracy - without revealing what I do not fully grasp, I can say that it operates by the ethics that vo would require, namely a fluidity that allows whole values to trump petty interests.
(petty interests is essentially mesh of broken up and scattered self-valuings - it is non-individual, it rears its eyeless head between tired and/or lowly people)