I think an observation to be made from the "a leader doesn't decide who is right" point of view is that ..........

some people's behavioral compass is in a state of being hi-jacked by acceptance of a "faultless doctrine". The idea that there are no legitimate or predictable negative consequences to poor-wrong-bad behaviors. I suspect this, to some great extent, is a result of our litigious society's corrupted and liquified concept of justice. This result has a corrosive effect on general civility, a return to the jungle and its laws.

The plainest example of this ethos in action is, I think, represented by attorneys and their big brothers and sisters, judges. Propounding the positive value of wrongness or denial of guilt and consequences is integral to performing some tasks associated with the legal profession. It requires the divorce of evidence from fact, cause from effect, at some level and to some extent. It is controversial that so many of our government's elected performers spring from a profession wherein the balance of right vs wrong is in eternal and circumstantial adjustment.

Hey, I get there's no preferable system available. I'm just saying, one often gets what one is willing to pay for or tolerate or elect.