Reply #87: That's what I stumble on, the inequity of gatekeepers...

[WHAT]

in the sense that an inherited position implies a sense of entitlement in the form of standard bearers.

I want a level playing field because of the wealth of enrichment that talent can bring to life. I do wish for a base-line of shelter, nutrition, health to be met, but, after that I think a person's passion, care, ability should be compensated. My own satisfaction would be met by good literature, good art, good music, good ideas, etc. as an enrichment allowed to be brought forth by the exceptional (which is not an exclusive trait of the rich no matter how tight they weave that spell that calls forth acclaim as an entitlement of class rather than talent).

I don't think I would want to be rich because I suspect they might be more brain-washed that the "sheeple" as a necessary part of class up-bringing/protection. It seems there are a lot of (exceptions to) mores so there is an inbalance in perception that serves to heighten and conversely diminish a person's value with the rich. I enjoy that there are pockets of care and discretion that may be furthered in a sheltered and directed focus that, sometimes, only the rich can sustain. But, I still want all parts free to express which gate-keeping seems to reduce.

Class seems to permeate our culture but no-one seems to be able to be honest about it; that makes it impossible to be objective. Status seems to be more by decree than consensus, anymore, so that it's a false culture...not true.

I want a level playing field, I want a true culture without the extremes of beast or saint. People should not have to overcome their culture in order to be mature.