Y’know that fancy-enlightenment-stateman-philosopher stuff about “A government of Laws and not of Men”?
It’s an idea with many virtues; but it’s also an idea that runs blatantly counter to how humans have operated for most of history (kin/clan groups, hereditary dynasties, diplomatic marriages, social relations of reciprocal favor/gift giving, etc, etc.)
Cities, to a substantial (but by no means total) degree are one of the few things that really atomize such relationships just by sheer scale. Our little hominid social brains just can’t hack it past maybe 150-odd people. It’s certainly possible for subsets of an urban population (whether it be the Great and Good of the halls of power, some down-at-heel street gang, or anything in between) to form tight social cliques, and the instinct to favor ‘us’ over ‘them’ (see also “Professional Courtesy” as used by police officers); but it’s much harder for a single socially-cohesive clique to wear most of the hats, because cities are just too damn big. Rural jurisdictions, by contrast, just don’t have so many seats to fill, so it’s much easier for an organically-associated social network to have a lock on a substantial portion of the action.
