If those in power never cede any of their power to the oppressed, enslaved or disenfranchised, why do I, and others of the “entitled class”, advocate for equality in all aspects of society for the oppressed and marginalized ?
It is simple. It is our best interest. Yes, as a humanitarian, it is easy to say, I do it because I love all people and I love justice. But that doesn’t square with the reality of the first statement about never ceding power.
Somewhere in time, with the rise of white Europeans, as opposed to when brown skinned and black skinned people from Africa and Asia, probably traceable to the Greek and Roman empires, but especially when you fast forward 3000 years to the 1400s or so and the market for stolen Africans is strong in Europe and even stronger in the service of Europe in the new world, when a fourth (or fifth class) of human is added to the mix. And all the others were mostly white, though in Europe, the dark-skinned person was uncommon and might be treated more or less as civilly and his money, power and education might otherwise afford him.
Generally speaking, the aristocracy, held the cards and passed them on to their own and occasionally made room for the upper end of the merchant class’ sons. They were able to hold the land, the gold, and all the raw materials as they understood them, and they were able to operate within a frame work that only required the rights of their peers to be respected. Leaving the 90-99% to be used as they saw fit. The industrial revolution made a few inroads with dollar Princesses giving their sons opportunities and industrial schemers opportunities for themselves and their sons , but soon it sorted itself out, with a slightly different set holding the same keys to power, to wealth, to society.
This has given us generations, literally hundreds of generations of entitled (and titled) inbreds, whose sharp and grasping parents coddled them so much they were of lower intelligence, and lower morals, to the extent the originals had any moral except might is right. They drank and smoked and had illicit affairs for which only the poor women were made to pay. This system worked reasonably well for those at the top for a thousand or so years. The system was constantly improved by the meritocratic system of letting the best and the brightest move up a notch or two. The field hands son who had some promise moved up to overseer, or more likely into a plum slot with the government, then his sons, if they were bright and aggressive, but civil enough moved up into the upper reaches within a generation or two.
Not women, and almost never people of color. So, of all the world only a sliver were ever eligible to participate to their fullest, Oxford and Harvard, and large strong organizations like banks and law firms allowed a small segment, maybe 5% of the people to get a foot on the rung, and in the process kept 99% of the 1% in a safe successful course, even if they were lazy idiots by this time. In retrospect, this has probably always been a bad system, even for the 1%, and certainly a bad system for everyone else.
Think of the wars, the slow moving and poorly thought out industrialization of the west, think of the plagues and epidemics. If you think that for nearly 2000 years, maybe twice that long, only 5% of the world could contribute much more than hoeing weeds and shoveling out stables. What would a fully developed set of education and opportunities for the other 95% spared us? No one can know. But one can use pure cold logic to see that one 20th of something is not as capable as al, of it. If you were given one 20th of your paycheck, could buy as much? Of course not! Yet, for literally thousands of years, we have used the human capacity in just that manner.
We have allowed a system of affirmative action to protect and promote a small circle, even when a lager and lager segment of that circle was becoming less and less intelligent, curious and enterprising. Someone, somewhere, about 100 years ago. Not Lincoln, and Not FDR, but someone, somewhere began to agitate for better treatment of blacks and women. Over those past 100 or so years, society has slowly opened its eyes to the contributions people other than the sons of aristocracy can make.
Today, universities and large corporations insist on a more representative student or work force than even when I was young. Of course, those who are the sons and fathers of the protected class have pushed back. They claim they have been badly treated because they are white men. The world is unfair. The world does not appreciate the “exceptionalism” of the white male. These are the crybabies, white males, and to a lesser extent, white women.
Wiser people, even of these protected classes, realize that their protection is actually harms not only most of society, but even can harm themselves. Today, we are surrounded by a longer list or scarier hazards than possibly ever before. We need 100% of the people on this planet working at 100% of their abilities to solve the world’s problems. It will be the poorest and the weakest who go first, but we have existential threats to the human species lurking around every corner, the one %, even the 5% will not be enough to sustain humanity as a race.
Long before it gets down to the choice between “us” and “them,” the 95% will be at the gate of the mansions and the loyal servants will not be able to protect the lazy worthless parasite class from the torches and the pitchforks. We all work to build a better safer more sustainable future, or there will not be one. For this reason, affirmative action for upper class white males and even middle class men a nd women must end. It must end now. This white backlash this at the heart of European nationalism and American white supremacy that is propping up the Trump administration must be squashed at every turn!