Of course, 'Economic Values' and accomplishments are essential to a 'Successful Economy'.

Of course, 'Economic Values' and accomplishments are essential to a 'Successful Economy'. A well developed 'Corporate Structure' and its 'protection' as such is 'essential' to the 'productivity' of the Structure. But, being 'essential' in the Economy is 'different' from placing it in the 'Higest Rung' of the 'Social Value' system. The 'Economy is essential because the Social is essential'. One could not imagine a Tribe of Indians creating 'Corporate Indians' to 'merely exist' alongside the 'Real members' of the 'Tribe'. There's a reason for the 'Corporate System' but our Corporate Creations can not 'free themselves' from the purpose for which they were created. We must remember that our Corporate Creations were created for the purpose of 'contributing' to the economic aspects of the 'Social System'; of the 'Condition of Togetherness'; or of the so-called 'Many'. The 'One and the Many' is a 'Form' that must be 'filled-in' with 'different value systems' that help 'integrate' the 'Social Aspects' of the So-called, 'Many'. The creation of 'a Person in Contemplation of Law' is understandable. But, that 'Person' is not the same as a Real Living Person and it should not usurp or dominate the function of the 'Real Human Worker'. It 'can be Huge' and it can also be a 'Fiction' but it should 'not Function' as an 'Autocrat'. Our 'Social is Democratic' so why not require the 'Corporate Structure' to also function as a 'Democrat'. 'Require it' to 'Contribute towards Democracy'!

If all 'Political Activity' is 'knowledgeable activity', of 'what' must it 'consist'?

If all 'Political Activity' is 'knowledgeable activity', of 'what' must it 'consist'? Well, we can't forget that 'Knowledge is knowledge'. Its a 'Knowing of sorts'. That's kinda vague, but in this case, its a knowing of the 'Relation' between the 'One and the Many'. Why do we need a 'Relation' there? Simply because the 'One' is 'Institutional' and the 'Many' or 'Bottom' of the 'Activity' is 'Real'. The 'Bottom' is 'Real' like in a statement that a 'Human Being' is a 'Real Person' or a 'Real Human Being'. If thats the case, why do we say that a 'Business Corporation' is a 'Person' in 'Contemplation of Law'. We certainly must give credit to the 'Law' that it 'admits' that a 'Person' in 'contemplation of Law' is a 'legal Fiction'. Of course, that leads to the further question, 'why' do we need 'Fictional Persons' when we already have 'Real Persons' who constitute the 'Bottom' of the 'Political Activity'? That would be the Social. Why do we need to 'create' 'Fictional Entities' at the 'Bottom of Social Activity' or, more precicely, at the 'Bottom' where the Economy becomes an 'important aspect' of the 'Social'? Of course, thats why we are called a 'Corporate Society'. But a Society is composed of 'Human Beings' not 'Fictional Beings'. If the 'Social' was composed of 'Fictions', even one 'lone Individual' on an 'Island' would never be 'lonely'. Unfortunately, the 'misplaced' 'Social Value' system of 'Money' and 'More and More of the same' ( pofits) has created an 'imbalance' in the structure of the 'Social and the Economy'. 'Legal Fictions' have become 'more valueable than the 'Human Condition'.

How does one evaluate the different Forms of Government?

How does one evaluate the different Forms of Governemnt? Not an easy task because Governemnt depends on a 'proper Relation' between the 'Top' and the 'Bottom'. That proper 'Relation' has to 'consider' 'both aspects' of the 'basic structure' of 'Government'. Why must it do so? Simply because 'Governing' is a 'Relation' between a 'Top and a Bottom' and not a difference in the 'Human Condition'. Humans are alike, yet different. A 'structure' that 'does not consider 'both ends' of the One and the Many does not consider the 'connection' that constitutes the 'Governing or Ruling' process. A 'Tribe' has a Top and a Bottom, even a 'Group', no matter its 'function' or its 'goal', has a 'Top and a Bottom'. The 'important aspect' of the 'structure' is the 'Relation' that 'flows', or 'doesnt flow', from the 'One' and the 'Many'. The larger the Group the more difficult to relate to a 'Top and a Bottom'. Of course, the difference in the 'Governing process' is not a 'Human Difference', but a difference between the 'Means' by which any 'One' or 'Group' of 'Individuals' 'ascends' to the Top of the 'Governing Relation'. A 'Ruling Relation' is different from a 'Governing Relation'. Since, Individuals are all 'Alike', i.e. 'equally Human', there must be some 'qualifications' for 'occupying' the 'Top' rung of a 'Governing Relation'. All 'Political activity' must be 'knowledgeable' activity.

Is the 'Democratic Form' of 'Government', the Best Form ?

Is the 'Democratic Form' of 'Government', the Best Form? All 'Governemntal Forms' are about a 'Political Top' and a 'Political Bottom'. There are no alternatives because all Governmental Forms are about a 'Top' that 'Governs' and 'its relation' to a 'Bottom' that is 'Governed'. The so-called the 'One and the Many' is a very basic structure, but it 'creates a Relation' that 'connects' a 'Top to a Bottom'. That 'Relation' can be 'Arbitrary' and 'function' only from the 'Top down'; but the 'Relation' can also function from the 'Bottom Up'. From the 'Top down' is 'Rule'. From Both, the 'Top down' and 'from the Bottom up' is 'Governing'. A Democratic Form functions from both ends of the spectrum and the Relation of the 'One' and the 'Many'. In simular words, it functions both ways. Hence, it allows for a Two-way type of Functitoning. Actually, in the 'Democratic Form' the 'Bottom' helped craft the 'Top'. Hence, change is possible at both ends of the Relation. The Top can modify the 'Institutional structure' at the Bottom and the Bottom can 'modify' or 'Amend' the Political Structure of the Top. Of course, not all Political Structures function in that manner. One could say that the 'Democratic Form' has 'Both Doors' open for 'valid criticism'.

The 'Democratic Top' is slowly becoming 'Ideologically Weak'.

The 'Democratic Top' is slowly becoming 'Ideologically weak'. A Political TOP should be Ideologically Strong. Of course, some Political Ideologies are stronger than Others because the Ideology is held together by 'fewer' Political 'Ideals'. For example, an 'Autocracy' is strong at the 'Top' because the 'Top Rules the Bottom'. The Issue is not about 'Governing', or the 'Rules of Governing', its about 'Ruling' and that means that 'Rule' is 'just Rule'. End of Story. In such cases, the Top has all the 'political principles' of 'Rule' and it is up to the 'Top' to 'Rule' in a 'Proper Manner'. The so-called 'Divine Right of Kings' could have been a Good Ideology if, and only if, Divinity permeated the Top and the Bottom. But, it didn't work. The Top had as many variations as did the 'Bottom in the Divine Right of Kings Government. Of course, the same problem attaches to all Autocratic Forms. If the Autocrat is 'Wise', even 'Divine', or 'thoughtful of the Individuals' at the 'Bottom', that could also 'have worked'. But, that seems to ask for too much. The 'Human Top', of any Ideology, is as 'good and efficient' as the 'Human Being' at the Top. Hence the Democratic Form. All 'Political Forms' have a 'Bottom' and all Bottoms are 'Real' and consist of 'Human Beings', or 'Human Persons'. There is no distinctions between Race, Color, or Creed and they all live together in a 'Condition of Togetherness'. The problematic is the Human Condition. Why?, Because, all Tops are occupied by a 'Human Being'. Hence the 'Democratic Ideal' of a Governemnt 'of the People', 'by the People' and 'for the People'. The end-result is still a Top with Humans in Political Positions of 'Power'.

Tensions in a 'Real Democracy' are inevitable. Both the 'Top' and the 'Bottom' have to 'Balance the Equities'.

In a Real Democracy there will be 'Social Tensions'. Both the Top and the Bottom must work 'Together' to balance the Equities. A 'Form' of 'Social Equity' arises only in a Democracy. The reason is that each 'Real Individual' is 'Free and Equal'. Each has 'His, Her' Life and is 'entitled' and 'expected' to live in 'Freedom and Equality'. Notice, I say, each 'Real Individual' and by that I exclude 'Corporate Persons'. A 'Corporate Person in contemplation of Law' is 'not' a 'Real Person'. This viewpoint does not take away any 'advantages' that it gets from its 'Situation' in the 'Economy' as a 'Business Corporation'; it merely Identifies it for what it is, a 'Legal Fiction' and allows it to 'function' 'only in the Economy' as a Fiction. Thats an economic classification, 'not' a 'New Human Creation' in the Social. The Real Individuals at the Bottom are expected to 'work out' there own Inequities and Inbalances. A Political Top has Power at the Top but, an 'Institutional Political Top' has an 'Attributed Power' not a 'Natural Power'. All 'Governing Agencies' are 'Institutional' and hence posseses 'only what they are 'Given' and never 'something' that they get from 'Nature'. In a 'Real Democracy' the 'Real Individual' is 'expected' to work out His, Her, own Social Equities.

The Abstract Top must 'Govern' the 'Real Individuals' in their 'Condition of Togetherness' at the 'Bottom'.

The 'Abstract Top' must 'Govern' the 'Real Individuals' in their 'Condition of Togetherness'at the Bottom. Thats 'one Reason' why the 'Nature' of the 'Top'( all Political Tops) is an 'Abstraction' and the Condition of the Bottom is a 'Condition of Togetherness'. The Bottoms 'Condition' is not 'One', 'Unified Condition', or 'Social Entity'. It is composed of a 'Multiplicity' of 'Real Individuals' living in their 'Freedom and Equality'. As such, Each 'Individual' is 'His'/'Her', own 'Person' and is 'Individually Free and Equal'. No Human Being 'lives on behalf' of 'Another'. Each is Unique. In this 'Isolation' the 'Individual' seeks for 'Another' to share his 'Life' and establish a 'Family'. A 'Democratic Top' respects this condition of Freedom and Equality and a 'democratic Bottom' should also contribute to the 'Solidity' and 'Stability' of the 'Political Entity'. The Top must Govern, not Rule and the Bottom must contribute to that 'Government' by 'Living without Tensions' in its 'Condition of Togetherness'. Of course, Democracy has its 'Problems'. The 'Political Parties' divide into a 'Two Party System'. (they Both claim to be Democratic, but are they?) Very often the 'Free and Equal' Individuals at the Bottom 'form their own Ideas and Opinions' as to what 'Democracy really means'. Some 'descriminate' on the basis of 'Race', others on the basis of 'Money' and 'economic class', and some on the basis of 'Religion'. Can a Democracy survive 'Tensions' in the 'Ideology' and at the 'Bottom'?

The 'Ideological Top' is abstract; the 'Generalized' Bottom is 'Individualistic' and 'Real'.

The 'Ideological Top' is 'Abstract'; the 'Generalized' Bottom is 'Individualistic' and 'Real'. The 'Top' can be easily 'distorted', but it remains Abstract; the 'Bottom' can also be changed, but it 'remains Real'. It cannot be otherwise. Each Individual has an opportunity to 'express' and 'Live' 'His', 'Her' Individuality and 'Today', even to change their Sex, but never their 'Humanity'. The Top is just as easy to change as is the Bottom. But, a change in the 'abstract Top' would change the 'nature' of the 'Top'because it is 'Ideological' and it would also 'effect' the 'Bottom' because the Ideology 'relates' to all the 'Individuals' at the Bottom. Hence, an Ideological Top Governs 'Everyone' and the 'Bottom' which consists of all the Individuals is 'Free and Equal'. Hence, the Bottom in its 'condition of Togetherness and Multiplicity' must be 'constrained' by Reasonable, Cultural, and Social 'Laws'. Hence, the Top 'relates' to the Bottom and the Bottom 'relates' to the Top. Hence, both 'Institutions' must relate to 'each other', to keep Democracy 'viable'.

The Problems at the Top are usually the Implementations of the Ideology.

The Problems at the Top are usually the 'implementations' of the Ideology. Most Ideologies are designed to Control the 'Bottom' in a variety of ways and most use Language that implies 'Fairness and Equity'. Some even use the word 'Democracy'. But, sometimes 'that Language' can be abused and can be 'justified' in the 'wrong manner'. As a general Rule the Top becomes 'fixed' and the exercize of Power is considered as a 'strong' political place of Power; one that Individuals dare not criticize. A Democracy will not allow Autocratic behavior by its Office Holders but, the Top merely shifts the definitions at the Top to justify some shift in the acquisition of Power or 'economic advantage' and then re-defines its 'Political Policies' to fit the Legal Definition. For Example, calling a Business Corporation a 'Person in contemplation of Law' solidifies the 'Corporate Function'. Everyone knows a Corporation is 'not a Person' so why called it that? What does the Court or Polity hope to accomplish by so-doing? Well, for one thing it will extend the 'Protection' of the Corporation just by calling it 'a Person'. All of a sudden, an 'acknowledged Legal Fiction' acquires 'more protection' than 'other Businesses. An 'acknowledged' Legal Fiction that is 'Legally considered' to have the 'Same Rights' as a 'Real Person'. Some will say, thats not what they said. Then why call it that? If it 'hasn't been elaborated upon', why not hold it to the same standards as any other 'Corporation'? If it hasn't been clarified, it soon will be. How sad, even the 'Courts' are involved in 'undermining' the Human Condition.

Being called a 'Democracy' does not, in and of itself, constitute its 'Integrity' as a 'Political Entity'.

Being called a 'Democracy does not, in and of itself, constitute its 'Integrity' as a 'Political Entity'. The 'Top' has a 'Name', as does the 'Bottom', but the 'actual circulation' of 'Political Ideology' and the 'People at the Bottom', must determine its 'Real Identity' as a Political Entity. A 'Real Democracy' cannot arise from the 'creation' of 'artificial' Human Beings, or stated differently, a 'Bottom' cannot exist if its not a 'Human Condition'. All 'Political Tops' are 'Institutional', but never 'Natural'. The 'Human Condition' cannot be 'artificially created'. A Robot, no matter what it accomplishes, is never a 'Human Being'. A Robot is a Robot, end of argument. We must not confuse the creations of the 'Human Race' with the creations of 'Nature'. A 'Political Top' is a 'Political Institution' and 'all' the 'Bottoms' of such Institutions, are 'Human Beings'. Humanity in its 'Totality', is the 'same', yet every 'Individual Human Being' is 'different', and 'each' has a 'Personal, but 'Human Integrity'. When a Political Entity Governs or, refers to the Human Condition, it must understand that it, the Political Entity, is 'Institutional' and 'not Natural'. It must govern the Natural, but not Rule it, the Divine Right of Kings no longer exists. 'Political Ideologies' differ, but their 'Integrity' is determined by the 'actual harmonizing practices' of the 'Human Condition' under their care. The 'Name', of the Polity, in and of itself, is not the 'Ideology', nor its 'Practices'.

Can 'Democracy' be diminished by the Functioning of its Ideology ?

Can 'Democracy' be 'diminished' by the functioning of its 'Ideology'? Can an 'Ideology' be 'diluted and 'reconstructed' as a different 'Ideology' supporting a 'False Democracy'? Yes, Real Democracy can be 'diminished' by weakening and transforming the basis of 'Real Democracy' at the 'Bottom'. Any 'generalized weakening' of 'Freedom and Equality' by the 'Polity', as well as by the establishment of 'different Institutions' in the 'Social' can provide 'differences' that can be 'called false democracy'. For example, the creation of a 'Legal Fiction' as also being a 'Person in contemplation of Law' can, and 'has', created an 'unbalanced Economy' because of their 'Productive Superiority' that elevates the 'Business Corporation' or Legal Fiction as a very 'important aspect' of the 'Social'. We're already called a 'Corporate Society'. Do we address the Legal Fiction as a 'Who' or a 'What'? Do we say 'She' or 'He' doesnt pay any Taxes? Once a 'Verbal Inroad' has been 'created', its relatively easy to create other 'Misnomers'. A 'Business Corporation' being called a 'Person in contemplation of Law', not only creates the 'potential' for 'other Misnomers', it also creates a 'haven' for the 'basis' of a 'Plutocracy'. How many 'Autocratic' Nations call themselves Democracies?

The Top of a 'Democratic Polity' should be 'Intelligent'; and 'Compassionate' of the 'Individuals' at the Bottom.

The Top of a 'Democratic Polity' should be 'Intelligent; and 'Conpassionate' to the 'Individuals' at the Bottom. After all, the Top is a 'Democratic Institution' crafted to 'Serve' the 'Real Individuals' at the Bottom. It has no other 'Structural Function'. By the words 'Structual Function', I refer to its 'democratic nature'. Its function at the Top is the result of electoral-votes and the Representatives at the Top only serve in 'Office' for a 'Prescribed Period' of Time. The 'Political Office' is the 'Only Source' of 'Political Power'. The 'Democratic Top' Never has a justification for the exercise of 'Power' other than the 'Political One'. 'Money' is not a 'Source', 'Race' is not a Source nor is 'Creed'. Political Power is 'Electoral Power' and that is dependent on a 'Process' that is truly 'Democratic'. When the Bottom divided up into Political Parties, they established a 'Political Tension' that should not be there. Although, both Parties claim to be democratic, that 'Political Tension' is not really between 'Parties', its between 'Ideologies' which is 'used' to 'cement' their Power. Both Parties compete for 'ascension' to the Top where they can 'generate and exercise' their 'Political Power'. 'Politics' becomes a contest between Parties about which Party will 'Govern'. Govern they must, but the 'Institutions' and 'Laws' they promalgate will determine if they are being democratic or leaning towards Autocratic Rule. An 'Autocratic' or 'Semi-Autocratic Lean' will diminish 'Real Democracy' at the Bottom.