3 ms·
Unfortunately that poses significant justice issues. If every city-state can impose their own form of justice, you would have an exponential increase of injusti
by trboyden 6y ago
Unfortunately that poses significant justice issues. If every city-state can impose their own form of justice, you would have an exponential increase of injustices where a legal act in one city-state could be illegal in another. While the current system may be imperfect in that regard, there are more safeguards in the form of federal level standardization that limit the inter-state legal issues. Yes, a common set of rights could be established by treaty, but it would be less likely to be universally applied or accepted when silos have the power to make their own rules and change them on a whim.
- giantg2 6y ago" ...you would have an exponential increase of injustices where a legal act in one city-state could be illegal in another." Yes, this is a problem which has already caused issues, and mostly been resolved under the current scheme. Most states have some laws that preempt local jurisdictions from enacting anything beyond what the state has already enacted on the issue in question.
- alexmingoia 6y agoWhat is just is not universally agreed upon. Larger government doesn’t necessarily enforce your sense of justice. China is a large government. The axis powers were large governments. USSR was a large government. And what of the human cost? Millions of lives have been expended in the quest for justice. War is a path to universal law and one-world government. And what has history shown us? The larger the government, the larger the union, the larger their wars.