The natural people (human beings) they are the real citizens. The corporations (juridical fictions) they submit to the Commercial Right, to the Consumer's Right, to the Civil Law, to the Tax Right, but they cannot vote or to be voted for public positions, therefore, they should not have political power.

In practice, however, the corporations and businessmen's clubs has more political power than the real citizens for a simple reason: they give moneys to candidates and they control like this the political parties.

The politicians or candidates to elective positions, for his time, implore votes to the citizens and they ask money for the businessmen and corporations. Chosen for the people after the election they don't have any conflict of conscience: they always assist first the businessmen and corporations interests.

This is a distortion in any modern democracy. And it is for this that we should struggle for the return to the DIRECT DEMOCRACY. Technical conditions for this already exist (personal computer, internet, safe password, cryptography, etc... ) the one what doesn't exist is interest (of the politicians) or disposition (of the population).

Democracy s majority rule, or more often, mob rule.

It was democracy that allowed white majority to make black minority sit at the back of the busses and many more degrading conditions.

Our country was founded as a constitutional republic and the government's power to trespass into the lives of people was limmited.

I recall and old bumper sticker that said "Beware of stupid people in large numbers."

I, for one, do not want a bunch of interloapers telling me I have to live up to popular standards just because they are popular. I prefer freedom, not servitude to some utopian fantasy of people whom I don't think have my best intrests at heart.

Who puts more emphasis in the freedom that in the true democracy and it prefers to be governed by few is just a slave. Surprisingly the idea of freedom is that it forges his voluntary servitude. You need urgently to read La Boetie, my friend.

Read here: http://tmh.floonet.net/articles/laboetie.html

Who wishes to be governed by a few? Not me. I prefer freedom to being govermed. And so did the founders of the USA. Which is why they limited the ways that the people could be governed by the state, both the majority rule and rule of the few.

I am not suprized that some people would see only majority rule on one hand, and rule of the few on the other.

Democracy is not freedom. Democracy is majority rule. Give up your right to freedom in exchange for a voice in how other people live their own lives? No, that is voluntary servitude just as assured as wanting rule of the few. And I would not suggest anyone fall for that crap.

How about not being ruled? It is called freedom. check it out sometime.

Suppose 80,000,000 people vote. And that you are one of them.

Then you would have .0000000125 say in how you get to live your own life. Vertualy NO say in how you get to live your life

Oh, but that gives you .0000000125 say in how other people get to live THEIR lives. Which is none of your damned business to begin with. Also vertualy Zero say.

And what did you loose??? It is called freedom.
What did you gain? Voluntary servitude.

In a formal democracy (that is what we have) each entrepreneur is proprietor and absolute gentleman of his capital. In reason of this they behave as if they were feudal gentlemen (small companies), kings (medium companies) or an emperors (great companies). The small tyrants of the capital believe that "their rules" are above the state rules and it is for this that they don't accomplish the labor legislation and they bribe the agents of state fiscalization.

The small tyrants are organized in clubs and political parties and his main objective is to choose (legally or illegally) a great tyrant (Mayor, Governor and President) that allows to continue them to do exactly what do: to explore their employees as if they were servants of the field (small companies) and subjects (medium companies and great companies).

When the State decides to put the small tyrants in their owed places, they rebel and they use their followers squires (policemen and military) to give a coup d'état and they call this of REVOLUTION.

Formal democracy and true democracy are as oil and water. They are not mixed and they will never mix.

The freedom that you believe to defend just provides to the small and big tyrants to be able to do what they do.

there's Nation Socialism = fascism
there's Corporate socialism = fascism
there's Democratic socialism = water systems, libraries, schools, hospitals, roads...
nothing new about any of it.
just more word mush about who controls the people's labor and resources.

You can harp on the rule of the few ( formal democracy as you call it ) all you like. It will never make majority / mob rule any less of a tyrany, and it will never make your voluntary servitude to majority / mob rule something other than voluntary servitude.

For some reason, you keep pushing the either / or of two bad forms of governance.

But lets not forget that under freedom, the "formal democracy " would have no government authority to exalt anyone over their neighbors. And the feudal lords kings and emporers you hate could not buy government power, because the government would have no such power to sell them.

That is how the US constitution was designed, and what the tyrants (both buyers, and sellers of government power) have had to subvert..