A real relation between the Top and the Bottom

Democracy works if the relation between the Top of government and the Bottom of government is kept 'real'. There can be no transcending of the relation by the use of words and 'meaning'. Language and meaning are abstract and unanchored in the 'real' world. That is an off-shoot of the so-called Linguistic turn. Of course, language doesn't have to be completely unanchored, but meaning free-floats in abstraction and is subject to political shenanigans. Political language has always been used to cause confusion. The so-called Linguistic Turn just confirmed its many inaccuracies and described its 'weak' referential aspects. Nevertheless, language can come under more control by referencing the 'object' of discourse in a mathematical manner. Reference can still work fine, but the object of the reference must be categorized numerically. Number does not lie nor does it misrepresent. If democracy is about the People and policy and law are introduced to keep democracy viable and functional, then the Bottom of government must be quantified. A government "for the People" must be for the benefit and protection of the People. There can be no other reason for having an institution called "government". The Constitution sets out its triadic nature. Of course, each Branch must do its share, but the Judicial Branch must, of necessity, be kept objective. Its "interpretive practices" must be objective and if there is any part of government that should not be subject to a Party ideology, it's the Judicial Branch. The Constitution is not a 'Party document'. Its an objective classification of what must take place in any purported democracy. That's why the People are given the Constitutional right to "assemble" and petition the government for "redress of grievances". The Constitution protects the People. That's why the People have a right to revolution.