Kipling's poem justifying 19th Century colonialization has long been derided for its ethnocentric, if not racist, ideology of Western superiority. However, is it not still alive and well under the guise of Western (particularly American) guilt for the unequal distribution of wealth throughout the world?
It seems to me that the perception of undeserved wealth is almost a certain recipe for guilt and its attendant reactions. That can explain why many people who have had disproportionate wealth conferred upon them, through inheritance or economic happenstance (e.g., "celebrities"), have adopted an ideology of wealth redistribution to atone for it. On the other hand, those whose wealth has mostly been attained by their own personal efforts tend not to feel guilt for their success and do not share this ideology.
I suppose this dichotomy might be explained as Guilt vs. Greed. On which side do you fall?
It seems to me that the perception of undeserved wealth is almost a certain recipe for guilt and its attendant reactions. That can explain why many people who have had disproportionate wealth conferred upon them, through inheritance or economic happenstance (e.g., "celebrities"), have adopted an ideology of wealth redistribution to atone for it. On the other hand, those whose wealth has mostly been attained by their own personal efforts tend not to feel guilt for their success and do not share this ideology.
I suppose this dichotomy might be explained as Guilt vs. Greed. On which side do you fall?