The Cost of Leadership

Somethings shouldn't have changed. Years ago if two groups of peoples had a disagreement a meeting was held and their differences were discussed. If a middle ground could not be met two things could then happen. The two groups could arm themselves for battle or the leaders could meet in single combat to spare the lives of their warriors. If a challenge for single combat was presented by one ruler and his opponent refused to meet said challenge the latter party would often be dubbed a coward and traitor to his/her people more incline to send better men and women to die in their stead. Often times the leader position was not as highly sought after for this very reason. A leader would have to weigh the value of political power with the potential risk of single combat and death. With time rulers gained greater power and the position of king's/queen's "champion" gave rulers the out they needed. Thus a ruler could challenge another to single combat and their respective champions would duel to the death leaving these political leaders unscathed. How much better would the world be and how much less blood would have been shed across the years of human history if political animals were forced to face the same deaths that they condemn thousands upon thousands of nameless and faceless to die in their stead. Maybe political leaders would think twice about their arbitrary decisions if they knew that "their" lives were potentially on the line. Politicians would learn to care for their brothers and sisters on a much more visceral level. If politicians risked the same sufferings that their flighty decisions heaped on their constituents perhaps they wouldn't be so willing to make them for monetary or political gains.