Once established, a Democracy has no problems; all its problems become 'People' and 'Party' problems.

Democracy is a political structure. Its a structure established by all the People; where the People themselves constitute both the 'instituted Government' and the 'governed'. The institution of government, or the political structure, becomes a "given" of every-day existence. The problems become the People themselves and how they 'use' the 'system of government'. Of course, the political structure is an invariable abstraction, but the People in their 'individuality' are different. Herein enters the 'humanity', of every system of Government. Every system of Government, is composed of both, a 'political structure', whether democratic, or not, as well as 'a People', 'living in a condition of togetherness'. Well, one would think that once a democracy is formed, there will be no political problems, because the 'political' will be the 'same mind-set' as the 'Peoples mind-set', but that is not the case. The first thing People do is divide-up into different Parties, each with a different 'ideological mind-set'. It seems that once 'humanity' is allowed to live in 'Freedom and Equality', they divide-up into warring factions. The question arises, "is this an argument against Democracy"? No! absolutely No. But, it is a sad reflection of the mind-set of Individuals and their inability to handle 'political power'. Nevertheless, at least, we reduce the 'problems of existence' from a 'Governmental System' to a 'Human problematic'. The problems of Politics are human problems.

In a 'democratic economy', the 'People' have duties to 'democratic laws and principles'; so should the 'Corporate Persons'.

In a Democracy, the People must adhere to democratic principles. Of course, the People are Free and Equal within the system, but, if they should drift away from democratic principles, they must contend with the structure of the social, and the attendant laws that governs activities within the social and the economy. That basic rule applies to every Government. People must live according to the established ideology and the established social and economic practices of the society. That is one of the problems within the economy in a democracy. Any kind of 'legal control' over economic activity would be considered socialistic, and hence, not good. And that might be the case, if government was to acquire control over the 'profits motor' of the corporation. But, that's not what I'm saying and that's not the issue. The issue is that corporations are considered 'persons' under Constitutional protection, and that's also well and good. But, the fact is that corporations cannot be punished like a human being can be punished for violating the laws of their society, and that might be good also. But, the problem remains, and that is that corporations are artificial 'persons' who have been 'given' a tremendous economic grasp, but no 'democratic duties'. Of course, an important issue is, "what are 'democratic economic duties,'"? There are no easy answers. Nevertheless, it would seem that if they had 'economic democratic duties' also, there would be 'less concentration' of monies within the corporate structure, and hence, less inclination to hoard money in the top 1%. Now, to be clear, these democratic principles would not be 'government laid laws', but their own 'corporate laid rules' of functioning, within a democratic society. That is 'not socialism', because it is not governmentally instituted. It would be their 'own democratic manner' of 'existing' within a democratic society, of real individuals and 'legal fictions', living alongside each other. After all, government creates 'legal fictions'. 'Legal fictions' should have duties also, like all 'real people' do. Stop the hoarding, and implement democracy!

The problems in a Democracy are not structural; they are 'People' problems.

A Democracy, 'of the People', 'by the people' and 'for the People', has many problems. Some of those problems can be considered as 'People problems'. By that, I mean, that the 'form' of Government is the best there can be; but, the People themselves 'inject' problems into the structure itself. In other words, given a Democratic form of Government- a good 'workable form'- the People themselves begin to 'divide-up' among themselves. They form 'antagonistic political Parties' that begin to tear the democratic structure apart. Why is it that Parties cannot get together on a common approach to real democracy. For example, a basic principle of democracy is the 'Freedom and Equality' of each and every individual living within the Nation. Yet, we have 'racial discrimination'; 'economic discrimination'; 'class discrimination'; and we have 'gender discrimination'. How can that be justified in a political system that is based on the Freedom and Equality of everyone? A Democracy has a Government, of real People, and for real People, yet Corporations, whose economic 'grasp' is incommensurable, is protected to the extent that 1% of the 'population', if not less, holds all the 'wealth' in the Nation. We give lip-service to Freedom and Equality, yet are rife with 'discriminations' of all kinds. There's nothing wrong with the 'form' of the Government; its the 'representatives' who run it. The 'politicians' cause the divisions among themselves; they divide into antagonistic Parties, and proceed to rip democracy asunder.

Democracy and Capitalism are very important; but the People in the Democracy are more important.

The reason Democratic Government is important is because it is a Government, Of People, By People, and For the People. The most important aspect is the governing aspect because the Government must govern 'for the People'. A Government should never Govern for 'the Government'. The reason is because Government would not exist, but for the People. Actually, in a Democracy, the People run the Government, and that fact, places a very high responsibility on the Individuals in Office. Why is it that People in Office fail to represent their constituents and become more concerned with their political positions of Power? Simply put, many Office holders cannot handle political Power, and hence succumb to self-aggrandizement. That results from the shift from a political value, to an economic value. Economic values should not drive political power. Only the political values of Freedom and Equality can drive a Democracy. If economic values are more important in a Political system that calls itself a Democracy, its actually closer to being a Plutocracy. When Democratic values 'motor', and rule, in a Democracy, the whole political and social system benefits from the economic status of the Democracy. We cannot substitute economic values in place of democratic ones. The economy cannot drive a Democracy. A so-called Democracy that places 'more value' on economics, than on the Freedom and Equality of a democracy, is just a Plutocracy in disguise.

There comes a time when Government must ask itself, "what can I do for my People"?

There comes a time when 'Government' must ask itself, "what can I do for my People? Obviously, the need for Government is always present because there are 'Many' people and People need Government. If People and Corporate Institutions, are Free and Equal, they are free to inquire, produce, manufacture, better and better living conditions and better 'products'. 'Technology' and 'computational skills' advance very rapidly. The 'employees' and the 'economic positions', are being replaced by technology and computerized 'advances'. In other words, real People are finding themselves out of a job, or out of a 'position', in the economy. Government and advancing technology, are becoming more dependent on new technological developments, and less dependent on real People, and Government must ask itself, what are we going to do with the 'work force'? The 'assembly line' no longer needs People, it needs technology and technology is producing better and better products. Technology has replaced the human being in our societies and in our economy. So, what happens to the real People? That's why I say, Corporations need to become more 'democratic', and Government must provide for the human welfare. A Government, and an Economy, and a Social, cannot say, "I don't need People anymore, so I will not provide for their 'General Welfare'. The reason People need Government is because Law and Order and provisions for the General Welfare becomes imperative. There is no other need for Government. Government does not have a 'life' of its own. It cannot exist without People, and if it has People, it has a duty to provide for their General Welfare; that means their health, safety, economic, work, jobs, and subsistence, in general. If a Nation has People, it has a duty to govern them, and to provide for their General Welfare. Governments and Economies cannot say, "we have advanced so much that we don't need People anymore. People need Government, but Government must provide for its People. There's no other need for Government.

Every form of Government must have Power at the Top.

Every form of government must have power at the Top. However, every Government has millions of People at the Bottom. A Government should govern the People at the Bottom, not oppress them. The reason Government must govern is because the People are the real human beings that empower a Government. A Government is only an Institution that exists because it has People. If there are no People to govern, there cannot be a Government. It sounds simplistic, but think about it; can a Government exist if it has no People? Hence, the best form of Government is one that takes care of its People. It does not have to be a Democracy, but it has to care for its People. Stated differently, all People; all human beings, are Free as human beings, and all People are Equally human; hence all People are Free and Equal within any form of Government. Hence, the best form of Government is Democratic, a Government where the People elect those who are to have Power as Governmental representatives, at the Top of the Relation of the One and the Many. A Government, at the Top of the basic Relation of the One and the Many, must have Power, but it cannot forget from where it gets the Power. It gets it from the People, hence, the People should be the Governments primary concern. All Governments should provide for the general welfare, and the economic welfare, of its People.

Democracy cannot be 'changed'. Capitalism can be 'influenced' and hence 'changed'.

Democracy cannot be changed, because the 'People' in their 'condition of togetherness', constitute the 'underlying' essence of the political principle of Democracy. Capitalism can be changed because the 'basic functionary' is the Corporation. As we all know, corporations are recognized as Legal Fictions and are protected by the Constitution. That means corporations are not actually 'real human beings', as are the 'real People' that constitute the essence of democracy. A corporation is constituted by its Articles of Incorporation, that spells out the nature of the Corporation, and which functions by means of its by-laws, and in accordance with corporate laws. Well, Capitalism is a form of economic activity that is driven by the profits engine. Corporations are the creation of the State. Hence, the way to influence economic activity is to influence the manner in which the corporation functions. Of course, we 'cannot influence' the 'profit engine' because that is its main 'motor'. It can't function without it. Hence, we must structure the corporation in such manner that it becomes a 'good citizen' and functions as a 'real individual' functions in a democracy. This would make corporations more democratic. Hence, corporations would be more 'citizen-like' and less 'greedy'. The 'centerpiece' of most corporate activity is greed. If they are 'given' more democratic principles (after all they are creatures of the State), its possible to 'modify' the 'profits engine', and hence, to make corporations more democratic. A Capital-ocracy can replace a 'meritocracy', or a pure Capitalism that leads to 'greed' by the 1%, and hence, Plutocracy. You can't do away with Capitalism, or the Corporation, but you can influence corporate activity at the very basis of its existence. Government needs more control over its 'Legal Fictions'

Individuals living in a Nation have 'privacy', Nations do not 'need' nor 'have' privacy.

Individuals, or human beings, all have a 'right to privacy'. That's should be obvious to everyone. Nations, being verbal abstractions and having a 'National Identity', do not have privacy, nor do they need privacy. Their activities are completely 'representational', and hence, have political value only to the extent that they 'represent the Individuals'. Following the same line of reasoning, that the individual is more important than the Nation; the Individual constitutes the 'flesh and bone' of the 'abstract Nation'. Don't get me wrong, the Nation is important, even 'very important'. Nevertheless, we cannot ignore the fact that its an 'abstract entity' with tremendous power. But, the individuals 'compose' the Nation; they create a Nation to 'protect', 'provide' and 'organize politically', 'socially', 'legally', and 'institutionally', the General Welfare of the Individual. Nations are 'not' living entities, and since their function is a 'representational one', they cannot have a 'right to privacy'. What does that mean? It means that complete political transparency is essential to the 'representative' function. Nations don't have 'secrets'. They're 'transparent vehicles' for the 'abstract function' of political 'representation' of the human condition. Hence, Nations cannot 'spy' on their own constituents. That would entail an attribution of 'having its own existence' as some 'independent' political entity, with its own 'life' principle. That is ludicrous and cannot be. Sure Nations are important and even, very important, but lets not go overboard. Nations exist because 'real' individuals 'created' them. Nations need to understand the 'political part' they 'play' in the 'representational function' of the political 'condition of togetherness'. Nations cannot 'spy' on the 'privacy' of the Individual. That's a 'wrong use' of 'political power'.

Another problem of democracy are the People themselves.

The most basic problem of Democracy are the People themselves. Its very easy to 'live' in a Democracy, but the People are also obligated to live democratically. What does it mean, to live a democratic life? Living in Freedom and Equality requires that the individuals treat the Other Individual as Free and Equal. I don't mean to give 'lip service' to the slogan, I mean to actually treat your neighbor as equally Free and Equal, as one considers ones own self. One problematic in that area is the issue of racial discrimination. There are no inferior races; nor superior races. There are only human beings. All Human beings are Equally Free and Equally Equal. No Race can claim superiority, and hence, no Race should discriminate against another Race. Racial discrimination in any social manner, is wrong. And since, we must live in a 'condition of togetherness', which means we need Government, no Governmental Institution can, nor should, discriminate against the human condition. A Government that supports social institutions that are discriminatory, should not exist. That's why the Right to assemble is allowed to be in the Constitution. Its no wonder that there are Revolutions. Why is the human condition so weak? Why does it consider its own self, as superior, or better, than the Other. Its obvious that we are all the 'same', and in the 'same boat'. What happened? What happened was that we 'silently' and relentlessly 'slipped' into 'economic standards' that have nothing to do with Political standards. As 'Individuals' we 'became Plutocrats'. We are 'Plutocratic individuals'; hence, no wonder the 'powers that be', want a Plutocratic Government. That would be discrimination by the 'Haves' against the 'Have-nots'. That would not be racial, but equally as harmful. Unfortunately, the problem with people, is People.

A danger to Democracy is a Capitalism that succumbs to its own value system.

A big danger to Democracy is the substitution of the 'political value system' by the 'economic value system' of Capitalism. It goes without saying, that in order for Capitalism to 'work', individuals involved in economic activity must devote themselves to its many functions. Of course, the 'main economic activity' is that of 'making a profit'. Huge 'profits' equals, economic success. However, the success of the economy is dependent on the political value system that encourages economic activity and allows it the 'freedom to function'. The profits are made by 'economic actors', not 'political actors'. Of course, the main difference in the two, is that 'Political actors' are concerned with the Democratic values of Freedom and Equality, while 'economic actors' are concerned with 'making a profit'. Capitalism can thrive in a Democracy. But, and its at this point where the danger arises, Capitalism must not 'substitute' economic values for political values of Freedom and Equality. Its very easy, for the 'rich' to 'feel' that they are in control of the Government. But, the truth is, that its the other way around. Its the political values of Freedom and Equality, that afford it the freedoms of function without obstructions. That is the 'political posture' that grants to corporations their 'fictional existence', and the privilege to 'keep their profits', not to mention, being taxed like a 'real human being' and not as a 'fictitious entity'; Tax 'avoidances' and 'evasions'; and having been 'granted' an 'immortality', free of 'medical problems', not available to real human beings. A successful economy is a great thing, but a Free and Equal Democracy is greater.