Hagan wrote: I have a leader in Four towns and I try to be as fair and just as I can
Oh c'mon now. Four just and fair leaders? Do you not have more and less just leaders?
Anyways, in the real world, apart from ancient philosophy, I wouldn't say there was any western realization of "justice" for the "people" until the Enlightenment. Then, of course, we saw the two pivotal revolutions ensue thereafter.
Before then, Surly can correct me if I'm wrong, especially in Medieval times, justice would be in the hands of lords, counts, dukes, kings, and people with titles or estates. There's a parallel between that and Cantr, it is in the hands of the (usually) self-appointed leaders (or the comparatively easy to win "democratic" races which produce demagogue leaders) ... and in whose hands concepts like "justice" are interpreted. <b>These leaders are the executive, the legislative and the judicial all rolled into one bundle.</b> More or less, if you wrong them, you're asking for "mercy" more than you are "justice." And if one happens to be dim enough to have attacked the leader's friends, then the scales of justice would be weighted against that one person. It's that practical, both to understand and for the system to work at this level.
