Philosophically: The GM is like a king, like Agamemnon or Charlemagne. That doesn't necessarily mean the GM shouldn't compromise or listen to the players - good kings compromised and listened to their nobles. But at the end of the day, the king calls the shots, and everybody else falls into line.

Why?

1. MOST games require far more effort to be a GM than a player. I think greater effort put in should equate to greater creative control.

2. MOST games I know of are organized and hosted by the GM, rather than a player.

3. The campaign could survive if a player leaves. The campaign dies if the GM leaves.

I see a lot of really extreme, vocal rule-setting by GMs and players on this board. There are statements like the "NO GM should EVER tell you what your character thinks or how your character acts" you pointed out. But honestly, I have never seen a table that did not have plenty of room for compromise and working things out. Your table would be downright Talakealean if the GM and players are laying ultimatums at each other as commonly as the forums would have me believe.