It began with a simplified examination of morality and outcome. The argument went like this:
In a 2 caste society of law abiders and law refusers, the criminals are always going to win because they are unrestricted, wheras the law abiders have imposed restrictions governing their behaviour. The law abiders can be pre-empted in their actions as defined by their rules. It is a bleak view for those wishing to live within confined law systems.
The outcome is somewhat different. In practise what happens is the criminals take over control of the law system and are therefore doubly exempt from it. The people at the top of the law system are the worst criminals.
After many generations the majority of people of both equations had decided that the problem is not largely the 2 caste morality issue but rather the existence of a law system that protects the criminals controlling it more than it protects the law abiders.
A resolution was sought.
Part 2 to follow...
First published on facebook 1.7.2012