Party-Politics creates differences in democratic ideology, which leads to economic ideologies.

The only 'difference' that should be allowed in Party ideology should be a difference that reflects a 'point of view', albeit within a 'general concept' of democracy; in no case would it be a deviation from the general concept of democracy. In such a case, all Parties would still be following the concept of democracy. The general concept must include the concepts of the Freedom and Equality of the 'real' individual. Oftentimes, the 'difference' in Party ideology is based on a 'different foundation' from the democratic base established for the articulation of policy. One prime example, is the emphasis created by the 'insistence on extending' the 'fictional value' of the 'concept' of the business corporation. Everyone knows that corporations are not 'real'; without additional 'ado', that means they are "legal fictions", 'unreal', but, are afforded legal protection under the Constitution. That Supreme Court move may have been legitimate, at a time when they were 'viable economic entities', in an 'earlier' developing economy, but today, they are economic giants. Hence there is no necessity for 'expanding' their concept under the Constitution, into a concept that applies to 'real individuals'. Of course, I speak of Citizens United. The only motive for said 'expansion', would have to be a move to 'increase' the 'fictional value' over the 'real value', within a democratic social. Of course, that would shuffle 'political values' to a lesser political position and increase 'economic values'(money) to a more important place within the social, and the political. That, in itself, would weaken the 'democratic values' of Freedom and Equality, and strengthen the effects of 'money on politics', and I might add, brings us a lot closer, and quicker, to a Plutocracy. Maybe, we are already a Plutocracy, or an Oligarchy. Those forms of government do not recognize the Freedom and Equality of each and every Individual; they only recognize the 'freedom and equality' of the 'well-to-do', 'the rich', and the 'politically strong'. In such cases, the 'average human being' is completely left out of the political equation. How ironic. The human value system should be a system that is 'untouchable' by political institutions, but instead, the human being has to 'fight' for his/her God-given values. That's why we have the First Amendment; the political Right "peaceably to assemble and to petition the Government for redress of grievances". The Constitution protects the Right to revolution.