How can a Business Corporation function more Democratically?

There are many ways a Business Corporation can function more democratically. Most Business Corporations are Huge Corporations. Their Design is to function as Money Making 'Persons'for the benefit of the Corporation and its owners. The Supreme Court's Baptism of the Corporation as 'Person' opens 'protections' to it that are not available to the normal 'Real' 'Business-Person'. A 'Real Business Person', not a 'Legal Fiction' has a limited impact on its Business and the creation of the 'Supply and Demand' and 'Demand and Supply' required of it. The Demand must exist and the supply is limited to a much smaller Market. Most small corporations can supply the demand existing within the area of 'function'. They may well serve the 'Common Good' but only in a 'limited manner'; not the 'General Welfare and Common Good' required by the Constitution. Well, that's good, but the Large Business Corporation is in a better position to serve the 'General Welfare' and the Common Good of the Nation as a whole. Instead they serve the Sole Owner and the few Owners who strive for a place on the 'Forbes List'. Generally, most Large Corporations function as 'Autocrats'. A Constitutionally created Person in a Democracy that 'functions undemocratically', as an 'Autocrat'. Does that make sense? A Democracy that creates a 'Legal Fiction' that 'functions' as an 'Autocrat'. Every Large Business Corporation should have a clause in its By-Laws that require it to also serve the 'General Welfare' and the 'Conmmon Good'. Surely, they can find a way to do 'that' and since they are 'Constitutionally created Persons', and 'failing that', they should lose their 'Constitutionally created Personhood'. Isn't it time for a 'Corporate Society' to become a 'Democratic' Corporate Society?

Why can't Business Corporations function Democratically?

A 'Business Corporation' is considered as a 'Person' in 'Contemplation of Law'. Of course, Corporations, like other smaller Business entities, have their 'expenses', pays Taxes, as does a 'Real Individual'. They must also 'survive' in the Economic area as all Real Individuals also do. Yet, they are 'Money Making Machines' and are 'created' for a 'specific business purpose by 'By-laws' that states the purpose for their Incorporation, and regulates their Internal Structure, and Function. Their sole purpose, as set out in their by-laws, is for the Specific Production of an Item and its sole goal is to make a Profit'. It cannot exist for any other reason. A Real Individual doesn't have that luxury. A real Individual has a family and his expenses cover a 'variety of necessities'. Those 'necessities and expenses' are essential to living an 'acceptable life'. They must be paid. A Corporation doesn't have a Family, Medical Bills, food expenses, housing expenses and family expenses, such as health of family, education, and for the education of the family members. An Individual does. Is it any wonder we are considered a Corporate Society? Business Corporations are money making machines. Is it any wonder that our economy is lopsided. Why can't a Business Corporation function more Democratically? Parts of their 'money-making' could go towards establishing a more 'balanced Social' and towards a more 'balanced Economy'. Every Business Corporation should have a 'Department and a Function', created by their By-Laws that requires that they 'function' and contribute towards a more balanced Economy and a more balanced Democracy.

The Trump Years have brought forth 'Divisions' in the 'Social' that 'think' like an 'Autocrat'.

The 'Trump Years' have brought forth 'divisions' in parts of the 'Social' that 'think' like an 'Autocrat'. Autocracy and Democracy are Political Ideologies and should not define the 'Individual Personality'. Of course, the Individual 'Personality' has greater 'freedom of movement' and 'expression' than does a 'Political Ideology'. A Political Ideology is 'fixed; as to 'Political Form' and 'Political Structure'. Whereas, a 'Personality' is never so fixated as to avoid changes caused by the 'Enviornment'and the 'Social' and the 'Political Field'and the 'Economy'. Why? Because the 'Human Being' is a 'Persona' or 'Personality' and has a 'flexibility' not granted to a 'Corporate Structure'. A Human Being is 'born', 'not Created' by another 'Human Being'. He or She is 'Real' and 'not' a 'Fiction' nor a 'Legal Fiction'. But, the Supreme Court, in its 'infinite wisdom' has held that the 'Business Corporation' is a 'Persona' in 'contemplation of Law'. If Business Corporations are considered 'Persons' in the Economy, shouldn't 'they also' exist in the same 'Democracy' that 'gave them' their 'Legal Existence'? Shouldn't they also be considered as 'Existing and Living' within a 'Democratic Social', as are all other 'Persons'. So why don't they engage in 'Democratic activity'? Why is a 'Created Economic Structure', existing within a 'Democratic Social', allowed to be solely 'Autocratic' in 'function'? Why can't they be Democratic in function? Why can't they also help 'contribute' to the 'Democracy' that allows for their creation? Maybe that would be a more 'Proper Capitalistic Function' of the 'Corporate Structure'? Wouldn't that be more 'Democratic' than 'Autocratic'? Maybe that would make us less a 'Corporate Society' and more of a 'Democratic Economy' in a 'Democratic Society'.

In a Democracy, the 'Bottom' has a 'Multitude of Individuals'; some of whom want to "GO" to the Top.

In a Democracy, the 'Bottom' has a 'Multitude of Individuals'; some of whom want to get to the Top. How is this phenomena controlled? By 'controlled', I don't mean 'absolute control' because that would be Autocratic, but, some kind of 'Democratic Control' that is 'Fair and Equal' to all who want to engage in 'Political Office'. Certainly, 'Rules' can be 'Fair and Democratic'. It has become obvious that Many so-called Politicians have become 'Office Holders' and are not in the least bit 'Democratic', nor interested in Democracy, but are 'Small', 'Uninformed', 'Autocrats'. Of course, some are Educated; some are Rich, and some even Billionaires. ( of course, I do not refer too every Educated, Rich, or Billionaire in the U.S. as I dont refer to everyone in Political Office.) But, the Bottom, during Election Time, has turned into some kind of Bar-Room Brawl.( here again, I use a Metaphor and don't reference Bar Rooms in general)There is no Order, nor requirements in the Political Activity of a Democracy. The activity is completely left up to the person engaged in Politics. Legal Profession has requirements; Medical Profession has requirements, and Many other disciplines have requirements and conditions that have to be met. Why, does the most important Position- being a 'Leader' of a Political 'Democratic Entity'- not have Requirements? Does that make sense? Surely, Honesty, Integrity and Fundamental Knowledge of 'Democracy' and 'Political Activity' should be required. And if a 'Genuine Candidate' should appear and not have the Money, He or She should be provided the Monies and the Means. This Nation finances many things, why not a 'qualified candidate' for President? Is 'Party Loyalty' so entrenched that it can't provide Real Leadership? How do we get someone who is really interested in the 'general Welfare' and the 'Blessings of Liberty'?

Why is the Human Condition so infatuated with Political Power?

Why is the Human Condition so infatuated with Political Power? There are no 'simple answers' and there have to be 'Many Answers'. There are as 'many answers' as there are Human Beings, at the Top, as well as the Bottom. How Sad. Of course, many Individuals don't really care to become Politicians, and are satisfied with living a 'Democratic Life', in 'Freedom and Equality'. Of course, there are those who wish to serve the Political Entity and Rightfully so, but, in a Democracy, Service 'must be' or 'should be' Democratic and some Politicians do serve in such a Democratic Manner. But, there seems to be those who do not seem to care to much about 'Public Service'; 'Freedom and Equality' at the Bottom; and 'Serving Constitutionally' at the Top. Some seem more concerned with the 'emoluments' of Office or the 'Exercise of Power'. I say, 'more concerned', because there is some 'proper exercise' of Political Power that is essential, practical, and necessary. But, sometimes one can detect subtle statements and some, not so suble, about lengthening the 'Tenure of Office', 'challenging the results of an Election', and even 'seeking help' from sources outside the 'involved' Political Entity. That kind of 'political activity' reflects an exercize of Power that is not Democratic and a 'Personal Attitude' that reflects an 'egoistic preoccupation' with 'Power' and its 'Emoluments' and an attempt to circumvent Democratic Institutions an installing 'Autocratic Institutions'. A Democracy will not last long when there are attempts to change the 'Political Ideology'. Any changes in Ideology and emphasis on 'Personalities', so-called 'Important People', or, 'Rich Individuals', or 'Strong Individuals' usually recognized as 'Desotic Individuals', will destroy Democracy and with that, will 'Destroy America'.

Every Governmental Top has a Bottom; and every Governmental Bottom has a Top.

Every Governmental Top has a Bottom and every Governmental Bottom has a Top. Thats the only manner in which a Governemntal Entity can exist: a Top that Governs or Rules and a Bottom that is Governed or Ruled. That seems to be the only solution to the problematic of thr One and the Many. But, even in a Democracy, the problem seems to be that some Democratic Tops dont seem to mind 'Ruling' and some Democratic Bottoms seem to be to 'eagar' to 'ascend to the Top' or become 'Agents of the Top' and to 'Rule'. Of course, in a Democracy the Top is voted-in by the Bottom so its Individuals at the Bottom voting in 'Leaders' that ascend to the Top to Govern and to protect the 'Democratic equilibrium' of 'Democracy'. But, even in a Democracy, some 'Agents' at the Top dont seem to be satisfied with 'Governing' and are to eager to 'Rule', or to benefit from their positions of Power. It would seem that in a Democracy the Bottom would be appreciative of its Freedom and Equality and would dedicate themselves to the business of 'Governing'. What happened? Where has the Political Organization of a 'Democracy' gone wrong? Maybe were asking the wrong question. Democracy hasn't gone wrong, its an Ideology, maybe the 'human Condition' has gone wrong. Where has the Human Condition gone wrong? Well, one of the first things that happened is that the 'People at the Bottom' formed into opposing 'Political Parties'. That already injects into Democracy, 'different concepts' about 'Government' and the 'relation' that must exist between the Top and the Bottom. Now we have the 'Republican Way' and the 'Democratic Way'. If they're truly both 'democratic' organizations, whats the problem? It seems to come down to the 'Individuals' who are involved in 'Politics'. Why is the 'Human Condition' so infatuated with Political Power?

Every Political Top must be Regulated and every Democratic Political Bottom must be Law Abiding,

Can a Democratic Political Top and a Democratic Political Bottom exist if they are not regulated? The fact that a Top is Institutional and has Institutional Power to Govern and the Bottom is the Governed and the Social has Freedom and Equality of the Indiviidual, renders the combination imposible unless both are regulated. A Top without regulation can become Autocratic. The Top must be regulated by a Democratic Constitution and the Bottom by Law. Both must follow the same Legal, Democratic, Ideology. A Top has Power, but its Democratic Power, as structured by a Democratic Constitution. A Bottom has Rights but its Law abiding and the result of an Equitable Balance of Power and a Democratic Bottom that must be Law abiding. But, the Law must be enforced, both at the Constitutional Top and the Law abiding Bottom and in accordance with democratic Principles. It must Govern Democratically and enact laws that enforce and protect the Freedom and Equality of the Individual at the Bottom. Otherwise, a Top with 'unadulterated' Power can usurp the Rights of Freedom and Equality. A Democratic Political Top with Power and a Democratic Political Bottom with Rights cannot exist just 'automatically' and without an Ideology. Each needs 'protections' and 'regulations'. But, a Top and a Bottom that is 'equitably Balanced' can exist within a Democratic Structure. 'Equities' and 'Balance' in a 'Democratic' Political Structure can exist if properly Instituted at the Top and the Bottom. Both the Top and the Bottom must retain and enforce a Democratic Ideology. Otherwise, a Top with Power can become Arbitrary, Selfish, and Despotic. In other words, it can become Autocratic. Hence, in a Democracy both the Top and the Bottom have to abide by Law and a Democratic Ideology. A Democratic Top Governs, and a Democratic Bottom must be Law abiding. Law must always Protect and Regulate the 'Freedom and Equality' of the 'Human Condition'.

When a Democratic Top of Power unravels, the Political Ideology is in Danger.

The unraveling of a Democratic Top endangers the Political Ideology of Democracy. Any other form of Government is not endangered. If an Autocracy or Plutocracy Unravels, it is merely replaced by another Autocrat or Billionaire. In such a case, the 'Form' of Government is not endangered. However, that will not work when the Ideology is Democratic. Why not? Because, a Democratic Form of Government that has a Political Ideology that Respects and Protects the Freedom and Equality of the Bottom and the Top has been voted-in by the Bottom and they both have a Democratic Ideology. A Democratic Top cannot function without a Democratic Bottom and a Democratic Bottom cannot continue to exist without a Democratic Top that protects and defends the Freedom and Equality of the Bottom. In such a case, the Bottom will lose its Freedom and Equality and the Top will not Govern with Freedom and Equality; it will Rule. The Democracy transforms into Plutocracy or Autocracy. The Bottom, in either case, is not Governed; it is Ruled. A Democratic bottom will not survive such a transition at the Top. The end of Democracy, at the Top, spells the end of Democracy at the Bottom. The Top becomes Rule and the Bottom become servants or victims of the Top. A Democracy must be protected at the Top and the Bottom. The Bottom is under Law and hence some sense of Order. But, the Top also needs Political Regulations that guarantees that the Ideology will remain Democratic and also that any Person exercising his/her Right to participate in Political Office will remain 'Democratic'. This last sentence does not refer to 'Political Parties'. 'Democratic Ideology' does not grant a 'Right' to govern 'Anti-Democratically'.

The Top has unraveled. What went wrong?

The Top, a very rigid form of political structure has unraveled. The Top is the Ideological structure of the 'Form' of Government and it seldom, if ever, unravels. Most Governments run smoothly at the Top. Of course, changes and alternatives are possible, but not 'unravelings'. Unravelings arise from 'incompetence' and from 'good old ignorance' and sometimes from 'plain Malice'by 'Officeholders'. Take your pick. Now the issue is how does the 'Top' steady itself to the point where it can still be 'Democratic' and 'Effective'? The Top 'is' or 'shound be' Democracy in Action. We've said that 'Democratic Politics' needs rules of practice; not 'iron clad' rules but Rules that are 'Functional' within a 'concept of Democracy'. Why, simply because anyone can Run for Office. Ask yourself, if someone with the 'disposition' and 'Persona' of a 'Dictator' wants to Run, should he be allowed to Run? Well, we dont have Rules that prevent that. What if a Billionaire wants to Run, should he be allowed to do so? Well when Donald Trump went into Politics he told the Republican Party, if you dont let me Run as a Republican, I'll Run as a Third Party candidate. They allowed it. He did not belong to any Party. He was not a Politician, and apparently didn't have a Political bone in his body. But, he was 'born' a Billionaire, and is 'still a Billionaire'. Now, the Republicans struggle to 'distance themselves from him, but their own Capitalistic Bones doesnt let them. So now we 'tether' between a 'Democracy and a Plutocracy, at best', and the 'Freedom and Equality' of the 'Real Individuals' at the 'Bottom', slowly but surely 'diminishes'. What happened? Well, the Democratic Ideology left a Big Hole at the Bottom and allowed just 'anybody to Run for Office' and never established 'Real Democratic Qualifications' for 'Political Activity'.

A Democracy has Political Power at the Top, but the Bottom has Freedom and Equality.

A Democracy has Political Power at the Top, but the Bottom has Freedom and Equality. Of course, anyone at the Bottom can Run for Political Office. But, as I have pointed out, Democracy needs to establish qualifications for Candidates that Run for Public Office. Sure, anyone can Run, but we cannot disregard the Dangers. One of the dangers is that given the Freedom to Run, the Candidate can seek to install a Plutocracy, or an Autocracy. We already have a 'Bottom' or a 'Social' with 'classes' of 'Rich', 'Poor', 'Helpless', and also of 'Many different Races'. That could lead to the installation of a 'Plutocratic' and 'Racial discrimanatory practices'. All that is needed is a shift from a Democracy of the People to a Government of the Rich, or a Plutocracy. How? By adopting the value system of the 'Big Business Corporations'. Business Corporations are already considered 'Persons in contemplation of Law'; they are 'Legal Fictions' and they are 'Money Making' machines, or stated differently, 'Money Making Persons'. Hence a shift towards 'Economic values'or simply 'Money', can and will distract from 'Freedom and Equality' as a basic 'Unifying Value'. 'More and More of the Same', or 'Money' or 'Profits' will 'lead' to Plutocracy and that can easily transform into 'Autocracy'.

When the Institutional Top 'becomes Disorganized' the Bottom becomes 'disorganized'.

When the Institutional Top 'becomes Disorganized', the Bottom becomes 'disorganized'. It cannot be otherwise. An Institutional Top helps keep a Bottom within its Democratic Boundaries. It does that by enforcing 'democratic principles' and Law; not by using 'Autocratic Principles' and 'Dictatorial Rule'; that will 'not work' and will contribute to the 'agitation' of the Bottom. The Bottom is used to Democracy even though there's a Multiplicity of differences in the Bottom's many different 'way's of leading a Democratic Life'. Also, the Bottom is used to 'being Governed', not 'Ruled'. A Democratic Bottom will not tolerate 'Autocratic Ruling' from the Top. Thats incongruent. But, when a 'Top' is also 'disorganized' and not in control, and does not know 'How' to 'Govern', the whole 'Nation' is in trouble and so is 'Democracy'. A 'Disorganized Bottom' has 'many ways' of becoming orderly. But; in the case of a 'Disorganized' or 'Malfunctioning Top', one has to wait till the next 'Election'. If we had 'Political Guidelines' for 'seeking Public office', that 'Political Mess' might be avoided. Where are the Real Politicians?

The Problematic between the Top and the Bottom is not easy to resolve.

The Problematic between the Top and the Bottom is not easy to resolve. The Top needs to be establihed as an Institution that 'Protects' and 'Governs' the 'Real Individuals' at the Bottom. Of course, there are many 'Forms of Government' for doing that. Purportedly, there's the Autocratic Form, the Plutocratic Form, and, of course, the Democratic Form. If the Form Chosen is the Democratic Form the Real Individuals at the Bottom play a very important part in the Institution. Hence; its called 'Governing', not 'Ruling'. Democracy doesnt Rule; it 'Governs'. The Democratic Form Governs the 'Freedom and Equality' of the 'Real Individual'. It emphasizes the 'Freedom and Equality' of the Real 'Person' as contrasted with the 'Democratic Rights' of the 'Corporate Person'. The 'Corporate Person' is recognized by Law as a 'Legal Fiction' and is 'not' a 'Real Human Person'. The 'Rights' it may have, may be called 'Business Rights', but, never 'Human Rights'. Its not 'Human'. Another Form of Government is the 'Socialistic Form'; it 'owns' the 'means of Production'. Its 'not Socialistic' to 'Govern' and 'promote the General Welfare' and 'secure the Blessings of Liberty' for the Real Individuals at the Bottom. Thats Governing. Politicians are calling a Democratic Form of governing Socialistic because it 'helps' the 'Real Individual' at the Bottom; and that is a blatent, intentional fabrication. Politics has been reduced to 'name calling', coarse language, misrepresentations, and an attempt to 'Rule', instead of 'Governing'.

Politics requires a high degree of Knowledge and Wisdom.

Politics requires a high degree of 'Knowkledge and Wisdom.' Democracy may accept the fact that anyone can 'Run for Office', but that should not include anyone that lacks the 'Knowledge and Wisdom' to 'do Politics'. Its one thing to say that anyone can Run for Office, its another to say that an Individual with an 'Autocratic or Dictatorial Personality', in our midst, can 'Run' and 'implement' his or her 'Dictatorial Attitude into the 'Proper Functions' of Democratic Office. 'He' or 'She' may have the 'Money', and maybe the 'Influence', but not the 'Right Knowedge' and 'Wisdom' to 'Govern' a Democracy. Thats why, it's important to have Basic requirements to 'participate' in Democratic Politics. Anyone interested in being a 'Politician' is Free to do so and its difficult to assume that such a Person would 'not be interested' in having the 'Knowledge and Wisdom' to do so. Where are the Requirements? All Proffessionals are required to be knowledgeable, qualified, and Licensed to Practice their discipline; why not Politicians? 'Absolute Freedom' to participate in some 'discipline' should not include the 'Unqualified' and 'Autocratic disposition' to 'destroy' the 'Democratic Process'.

'Politics' is not just about 'Political Power'; its also about 'Political Foresight'.

'Politics' is not just about 'Political Power'; its also about 'Political Foresight'. But, Political Foresight requires a 'thorough knowledge' of the Political Entity. All Political Entities 'didn't' just 'get there'. They 'evolved' into a location on the Planet alongside Other Political Entities. They have a history and hence, political Hindsight is also important. Hence, Politics is about the 'exercise of Political Power' with full knowlede of 'where its been' and where it 'wants to go'. In a Democracy, the 'Freedom and Equality' of the Individual, at the Bottom, is 'always' a political consideration. Freedom and Equality 'drive' the 'Democratic Entity'. Of course, its very easy for a Political Entity to be driven by Economic Factors. That shifts the Motor of the Social towards the creation and maintenance of a 'Corporate Society' and that 'creates' Economic 'Classses' and a 'Social Motor' that contributes to 'More and More' of the 'Same', to wit; Money and Property. These 'Behemoths' have already been 'elevated' to being a 'Person' in 'Contemplation of Law'. Great care must be excercized to insure that the evolution of the Social 'protects' and 'Expand's' the 'Freedom and Equality' of the Real Individuals at the 'bottom' of 'the Bottom'. After all, Democratic Political Entities are 'Institutions' that were 'Establihed' and were given 'Political Power' to 'provide for the General Welfare'.

There will always be Political Issues about 'How to Govern'.

There will always be Political Issues about 'How to Govern'. But the different Isues must be 'resolved' within an 'Ideology' that is Democratic in nature. There can be no variation from the basic Principle of the 'Freedom and Equality' of all Individuals at the Bottom. Freedom and Equality is basic and must be considered in the Resolution of the problem. For example: a 'Social Demonstration' that has arisen properly must be 'addressed' and not 'quashed' with the Military. To quash it with the Military would be the Autocratic Way; not the Democratic Way. Thats precisely why so-called Political Science and 'Politicians' need some kind of 'preparation' that 'qualifies' them to 'Run for Office'. It fine to say that anyone can Run for Office but great care must be exercised in choosing between Candidates. Hence, some 'background'; some 'Preparation' and 'Requirements' need to be established. Of course; anyone can Run for 'Political Office', but not everyone ' wants too, and not everyone is qualified to 'lead a Democracy'. Its Time to 'Wake-up'.

In a Democracy, Political Power at the Top cannot be Absolute Power over the Bottom.

In a Democracy, Political Power at the Top cannot be Absolute Power over the Bottom. To allow Absolute Power at the Top would be to allow a Top which can change its Democratic Character. The Power at the Top is a 'Transferred Power'; the 'Freedom and Equality' of 'each Individual' at the Bottom is transferred to the 'Institutional Top' for the sole purpose of 'Governing'. No Institution, 'per se', has 'Power'. It may have 'Authority' in certain 'Areas', but not Power. Certainly, Authority allows for certain types of 'Control' but, it does not allow for 'Power'. The 'Only' Institutional Instrument that can establish Power is the 'Constitution'. Freedom and Equality of each Individual is granted by a 'Democratic Constitution' and the 'Constitution' constitutes our 'Freedom and Equality'. It constitutes 'Us' and it can 'only Govern' us according to 'Law and Order'. It cannot Rule. Any 'Democracy' that purports to 'Rule' is 'not a Democracy'.

'Politics' is about Political Power over the 'Many' at the 'Bottom'.

Politics is about Political Power over the 'Many' at the Bottom. But the 'Many' includes 'all' the Human Beings at the Bottom of the 'Political Entity'. The 'Top' does not 'govern' 'Political Parties'; it Governs the Social of 'Real Individuals' situated at the 'Bottom'. But, the 'Real Individuals' at the 'Bottom' have seen fit to 'divide-up' into 'Parties'; an interesting phenomena, since all the Real Individuals are 'Free and Equal'. Of course there are Different States which are also Political 'Entities of Power'. Nevertheless, both Federal and State Entities are required to comply with the Constitution; hence, all Individuals are Free and Equal at the Bottom and both must enact 'Law and Order' within their respective Jurisdictions. So, why did the 'Individuals' at the 'Bottom' divide into 'Parties'. Of course, its a 'Personal' Decision to do So. Not all Political Ideologies would allow that. Most Authoritarian Ideologies would not allow that. Nevertheless, this Division into Parties should not impede the Democracy that allows it. But, neither should that be a reason for antagonism and outright animosity between the Parties. If Both Parties are Democratic, why should such an 'Ideological Clash' exist? Is it that one Party follows the 'Free and Equal Doctrine' of the 'Individuals' in the Social, while the other follows the 'Economic standard' of 'More and More' of the Same, to wit; Money. Isn't this the same 'distinction' between the 'Haves' and the 'Have Nots'?

Political Discourse is different from Other forms of Discourse.

Political Discourse is different from 'Other Forms' of Discourse. Usually, Political Discourse is 'modeled' after the 'Forms' of the Ideology of the Political Entity. 'Democratic discourse' differs from 'Autocratic Discourse' and 'Plutocratic Discourse'. However, when a 'Social problem' arises in any 'Political Entity', the problem is usually addressed in the 'Linguistic habits' of the 'Ideology'. Each Ideology has its 'Language', but 'all Ideologies' must distinguish between a 'Problem' that is 'Social in Nature' and one that is 'Political In Nature'. If its 'Political' the 'Linguistic Terms' of the 'Ideology' kick in. But, what if its a 'Human Problem' or a 'Health Problem' which involves all the 'Human Beings', both at the Top and at the Bottom; e.g. Hurricanes, Earthquakes; or Pandemics. Of course, each Ideology has 'Power at the Top' and will handle the Problem accordingly. But, in a 'Democracy', the 'Power at the Top' has been 'transferred' from the 'Bottom' to the 'Top' and the 'Power of Office' will exist only for a 'limited Time'. Hence, the question arises, how does a 'Democracy' handle a 'Human Problem'? Human Problems exist for a 'short time' or a 'Long Time. If its a Pandemic it will exist until the Problem is 'Scientifically' or 'Medically' addressed and resolved. That Issue is 'not Political'; its Human. Nevertheless, National maneuvering is required. Only a 'Unified approach' can be successful because it involves the entire 'Human Condition' at the Bottom. This is not a time for 'Party Loyalties' or 'Party Distinctions'. What's the use for having Power at the Top in a Democracy when the entire 'Human Population' is at risk and there is no 'Unified Approach'. We need to stop 'playing Politics'.

A Virus endangers a Nation; the Solution is not Political.

A Virus endangers a Nation; The solution is not 'Political'; the solution is not a 'Party Issue'; its a 'health issue' and it endangers the Life of all the 'Real Persons' at the 'Bottom'. So why are Politicians assuming 'Political postures'? Is it because they're thinking of 'Elections' instead of the 'Health and Safety' of the 'Population at the Bottom' of the Political Entity. Why should 'Children' be 'forced' into the School Systems and exposed to a Virus that may effect their Life or the Life of their Parents? How can 'so-called' 'Political Leaders' of a 'Political Entity' expose the Children of a Nation to 'existing dangers' that could prove Fatal. Who are the ignorant 'Individuals', or 'Person'; those at the 'Top' or those at the 'Bottom'? Every Nation should have a 'Monetary Fund' that could handle 'Catastrophic Occurrences' at the 'Bottom', such as Floods, Hurricanes, Earth Quakes, or 'Pandemics'. Does the 'Top' have such a 'Fund' or is it too busy 'Building a Wall'? A Real Political Resolution would focus on resolving the Problem and not on exposing the Population, especially the children, to the dangers of a Pandemic. How can Politics even be referred too as a 'Political Science'? Where are the 'True Politicians'?

A 'Corporation' is a 'creation of Law'; a 'Business Corporation' is a 'creation of the Economy'.

A 'Corporation' is a 'creation of law'; a 'Business Corporation' is also a creation of Law; however its a creation that 'functions solely' in the Economy. The Corporation is an 'essential' Social Creation; nevertheless, the 'sole function' of the 'Business corporation' is to 'augment' 'productivity and manufacturing' of 'essential economic needs' and 'Social' products and social needs. Its sole function has made it a 'Huge Entity. The 'Supreme Court' saw fit to 'categorize' that Entity as a 'Person' that 'exists in 'Contemplation of Law'. The result is that the Courts have created a 'Huge Person'. Of course, the 'Businesses' and 'Workers' and 'Human Producers' that compete in the 'same or 'similar activity' are 'small' in comparison. This fact 'contributes' to the categorization of the 'Social' as a 'Corporate Society'. A 'Corporate Society' is one where the 'Business Corporation' rules 'Both' the 'Economy' and the 'Social'. It creates 'Social Classes', 'Economic' Classes, and 'Classes' in 'Person-Hood'. A 'Legal Fiction' exists 'Side by Side' with 'Human Beings' and they 'function' and 'compete' with the 'Human Condition'. No wonder we are called a 'Corporate Society'. Business Corporations function solely as 'Economic Entities'; they need more 'Democratic functions' and 'values'. If they are going to be 'Persons in contemplation of Law', they must contribute to the 'Democracy' that allows them to 'exist as such'.