Mr. Christopher Arends Viewpoint argues in favor of the U.S. Supreme Courts decision on the Citizens United case and McCutcheon case. He argues that artificial entities (read artificial constructs made by people) should have the same rights as natural persons.
I am unaware of any wording in the Constitution equating artificial entities with natural persons. Artificial entities have no conscience, moral or ethical beliefs, feelings or thoughts. If they were equal to natural persons, they would surely carry the diagnosis of antisocial personality and/or psychotic.
My experience has been that, left unregulated, money and power tend to concentrate. The definition of democracy is a government ruled by the people through rule by the majority. If power is concentrated in a relatively few, how can the majority be represented?
In establishing the Constitution, the first paragraph states that the benefit of the Constitution is to promote the general welfare. How can the concentration of power and wealth promote the general welfare? Citizens United clearly enables the powerful and wealthy to become more powerful. The freedom of speech argument is a smoke screen to allow power to be more concentrated than it already is.