The Bottom began as a complete state of disorganization.

The Bottom began as a complete state of disorganization. Everyone, every family, every small group were on their own until the formulation of a Top of authority or of Power. How does a multiplicity of Individuals organize themselves and manage to survive? Of course. the essentials are necessary: food, clothing, shelter, work, entertainment, and the 'means whereby' these commodities and activities can be accomplished. The 'means whereby' a 'Social' could be build and establihed had to include the participation of most everyone. Slowly, the 'Condition of Togetherness' became organized into a 'Mobile Social' with different Institutions. Of course, the basic 'Unity' was the 'Family'. Another basic Institution was an 'Economy'. A large 'Social' cannot exist without an Economy to help provide the above essentials and commodities. The Economy is only one part, albeit a very important part of a 'Mobile Social'. If we look at that closely, how was it that it became the most important part of the Social. Of course, the economy is the producing part of the Social. But, it wasn't just the producing part of the Social but the fact that products could never move without 'purchasing power' of Money and Money was cumulative. The bigger the Corporation, a legal Fiction, the more it produced. The more it produced, the richer the 'owners': and the owners are in the Economy. Now we have "have's and 'have-nots'. A Corporation is an artifically created 'Economic Person' that functions like a Human Person and is protected by Law and is legally defined as a 'Legal Fiction'. A 'Legal Fiction' that functions as a 'real person' and 'functions' like an 'Autocrat'. Have we created a Plutocracy? A Plutocrat in a Democracy? How does one 'control' a Plutocrat in a Democracy that legally defines the economic Corporation as a 'protected Legal Fiction?

It seems that the Problematic of the One and the Many has resurfaced.

It seems that the Poblematic of the One and The Many has resurfaced. In earlier civilizations the problem was always the One at the Top and the Many at the Bottom. The Top usually justified its Power to Rule by some form of Superiority from the Highest point of Authority usually the Divinity or acquired by force or conquest. The Bottom were just the Many individuals, without Individual Identity and without any form of individual Superiority. The Individuals at the Bottom were non-entities, just plain Individuals and had no source from where they could draw some Respect, Authoriy, or Power. Today, there are many ways an Individual can assert His/Her Individuality. He/She can be very Educated, (of course in the 'Right' Rich Universities), being born into a Political Family, or just very Rich, or just having being born into Wealth. Notice how the concepts 'circulate' around Money. Of course that, in itself, does not resolve the Issue. the Top had always been dependant on the concept of the Deity. It was said that the King had Two bodies, one like everyone else, the Other, a Devine Body. The Top resolved the Issue of the two bodies and the Top became dependent on a Top with Institutiional Power. The Top lost its Divine aspect and became political and powerfull. No Institutional Political body can claim Divinity as the source of Power. Religion and Politics were separated into Institutions. But, the Bottom was in a complete state of dis-organization.

There are many things against the Law. Society sifts them out and makes them Illegal.

There are many things that Society sifts and makes 'Illegal' or 'controls' them in its 'Condition of Togetherness'. Why? Simply because they do not 'serve' the 'General Welfare' of a Democratic Society or simply because they are 'dangerous' to the 'General Welfare'. Society sifts them out and passes a Law eliminating or controlling such phenomena. Since Democracy is 'basic' to the 'togetherness' of the Human Condition, it respects the 'Freedom and Equality' of each Individual regardless of Race, Color or Creed. Race and Color should not be a problem, yet one sees developements that point to a modification in the 'Social Structure'. Individual beleif systems can be dangerous; an Individual can own a Gun, but he or she has no Right to amass an arsenal. Individuals in the Social are Free and Equal and hence have a lot of freedom with respect to their behavior, of course, subject to Law and Order. Hence, the prohibitions against anything dangerous to the 'Condition of Togetherness'. Individuals cannot do anything against the Freedom and Equality of the Neighbor nor to the 'Condition of togetherness'. To do so is to violate the Law against Freedom and Equality and the Integrity of the Condition of Togetherness. The Top of Power has two basic functions; to protect the 'Conditions'in the Social and to protect the 'Individual'. The function of the Bottom is to be 'Law Abiding' and respect the Freedom and Equality of the Neighbor.

Can a form of Government exist that is neither Autocratic nor Democratic?

An Autocratic Government no matter what form it takes, has Power at the top. There are several forms of Autocracy, but since Capitalism has overpowered the Purely politivcal dichotomy of Power at the Top and People at the Bottom, the relation deserves a new Look. It appears that the concept of the Divine Right of Kings has been modified by Capitalism. Plutocracy is Government by the Wealthy, and in most cases, for the Wealthy. The Non-Wealthy, Poor, or Needy, are tolerated but excluded from Governmnt Office or Positions of Authority. All Autocracies, no matter what Form, have Power at the Top. Autocracies have little regard or consideration for those at the Bottom. The issue seems to always be how did Power at the Top get there. In most cases, it used to be Revolution. But Capitalism is not Revolutionary, its plain, simple Power. How do these questions effect todays Democracy? Present day Democracy has been overpowered by an Economic System, it has created a new Dichotomy of 'Haves and Have-nots'. The Economy has overpowered the Divine Right of Kings. What happened to Elections and the Democratic process. The Democratic Form of Government has been overpowered by the Economy and now the deciding factor is simply Money. Of course, its considered 'Property' whether in the Form of Money or Property. Is this the Divine Right of Kings in a different Garb. The Dine Right of Kings was based on Religion and the Power of Capitalism is based on the Economy. We do have Very Rich people who do not display a single sense for the Freedom and Equality of the Human Condition. Freedom and Equality at the Top does not work, Neither does Capitalism. Governmental Power has been reduced to a Capitalistic system in a different Garb.

Every Form of Government is a Power Structure that either Rules or Governs.

The best form of Governemnt is a Government of the People; by the People and for the People. All Governemnts have 'evolved Historically' into the Institutional Form they assume. They can remain 'Rulers' or they can remain 'Governors'. Isn't it strange that Individuals,then Families, first got together so they could work together in their struggles with Nature. They evolved into institutions and 'solidified' into Nations and now are at each others throat. Of course, not all Nations are like that, but the 'underlying force' seems to be Size and Political Powor. What other motive can there be to become Large other than to be Powerfull or to extend the Boundaries of their authority. Isn't it strange that the human Conditions, in their present Location, size, and Political Identities must assume the Political Posture of their Nation? Humanity will not change simply because it Identifies with a Political Posture. Nor, should the Political Posture change simply because of its size and so-called Political Identity and Political Power. Every Form of Government is a separate Political Unit. But, it should not attempt to modify Human Nature simply because of its Size and its so-called Political Power. Of course, I'm well aware that Human Nature is not perfect, but it should not Identify with its Polical Identity. To do so is a dual mistake, viz. to your 'humanity' and assuming the Identity of a 'Political Entity' simply based on its Political Power. Human Beings should be gratefull they're Human Beings. They should be 'more Human' and 'less Political'.