republic (books 1 - 5)   

And the different forms of government make laws demo-
cratical, aristocratical, tyrannical, with a view to their several
interests; and these laws, which are made by them for their
own interests, are the justice which they deliver to their sub-
jects, and him who transgresses them they punish as a breaker
of the law, and unjust. And that is what I mean when I say
that in all States there is the same principle of justice, which
is the interest of the government; and as the government must
be supposed to have power, the only reasonable conclusion is
that everywhere there is one principle of justice, which is the
interest of the stronger.

Now I understand you, I said; and whether you are right or
not I will try to discover. But let me remark that in defining
justice you have yourself used the word "interest," which you
forbade me to use. It is true, however, that in your definition
the words "of the stronger" are added.

A small addition, you must allow, he said.

Great or small, never mind about that: we must first inquire
whether what you are saying is the truth. Now we are both
agreed that justice is interest of some sort, but you go on to say
"of the stronger"; about this addition I am not so sure, and
must therefore consider further.

Proceed.

I will; and first tell me, Do you admit that it is just for sub-
jects to obey their rulers?

I do.

But are the rulers of States absolutely infallible, or are they
sometimes liable to err?

To be sure, he replied, they are liable to err?

Then in making their laws they may sometimes make them
rightly, and sometimes not?

True.

When they make them rightly, they make them agreeably
to their interest; when they are mistaken, contrary to their in-
terest; you admit that?

Yes.

And the laws which they make must be obeyed by their sub-
jects--and that is what you call justice?

Doubtless.

Then justice, according to your argument, is not only obedi-
ence to the interest of the stronger, but the reverse?

What is that you are saying? he asked.

I am only repeating what you are saying, I believe. But
let us consider: Have we not admitted that the rulers may be
mistaken about their own interest in what they command, and
also that to obey them is justice? Has not that been admitted?