> The difference is in the use, origin and organization of such "capacity". Which makes all the difference in the world. The use, origin, and organization of p

> The difference is in the use, origin and organization of such "capacity". Which makes all the difference in the world. The use, origin, and organization of power is an expression of human nature, and is substantively the same within all human institutions. Differences in form do little to differentiate the range of potential abuses that concentrated power might enable. > To put it in another way, "private interests" amount to a dictatorial state Everything is a "private interest" - even a putative "democratic state" is administered and controlled by a specific set of people at any given time, and the mechanisms that are intended to hold those people accountable to some general public interest are, like all mechanisms, subject to being gamed and manipulated by people pursuing divergent purposes for the use of their power. (And even an ideal "democratic state" is still "dictatorial" in the way it operates - it creates universal top-down rules that everyone is expected to obey, irrespective of divergent particulars.) In the United States, there are exactly 537 elected officials in the federal government. Do you think there's a viable mechanism in existence that could keep those 537 individuals accountable in equal measure to each of 300,000,000 citizens? Do you think it even makes sense to regard there as being a single "general public interest" applicable equally to that entire population of 300,000,000?