I'm about to big brain you... what if there were no media and we got all our news from funsubstance? What's the worst that could happen? The media is full of different perspectives, 95% of what is put out is op-eds. 5% is actual journalism. That's entirely why op-ed disclaimers are a thing. This whole point of the particular movement is that most of the time, us whities don't need a defense. When you can devote your time to the offense, you can perfect it. You'd have to be silly thinking their is not a power difference. All that being said, trying to shift the power difference direction out of spite is equally as fucked up. I wish I could Thanos it and strike a balance, but that idea is pure fantasy. I don't know how we fix it.
My point is: within a power structure you build yourself, you're either consciously or subconsciously design it in you favor, which means people like you will benefit more from that structure than people not like you.
The only idea of balance ever attempted was by Alexander the Great (except for his personal Darius beef, of course)... and well... look how that ended. Not only did he die, he managed to get nearly everyone around him pissed off and got poisoned; simply because he attempted to treat them all equally. People will always have their own self-interest at heart, even if they are so delusional they think fighting that instinct through charity is wise. That's STILL in their own self-interest as it gives them some sort of superiority? You know who the most unfathomable child murder is in all of history? Mother Theresa. She proclaimed to be helping these kids, then take charity and give it to the catholic church so she could buy her sainthood. It's not that she directly committed
each murder, it's that she lied to everyone that wanted to help those kids and just let them die, that makes her a murderer as it wasn't her money to give the church. The person that hires the assassin usually gets charged the same, as murder implies both intent and death of someone else.
edit: forgot the most strange part. Her stated mission was to help children get to God faster. The people that heard that assumed she meant teaching and taking care of the kids, not causing mass death and torture. Yes there was a school, what the catholic church never says is the fucking thing was empty.
Maybe look up Piaget's equilibrated state idea
Once you understand that, you'll move behind the simple-mindedness of "power/competence structures only benefit those who generate them"
That's also part of the point, it's never in a perfectly balanced state, otherwise it would never have the need to adjust. It can get really, really, close, but perfect balance will never be achieved.
The only idea of balance ever attempted was by Alexander the Great (except for his personal Darius beef, of course)... and well... look how that ended. Not only did he die, he managed to get nearly everyone around him pissed off and got poisoned; simply because he attempted to treat them all equally. People will always have their own self-interest at heart, even if they are so delusional they think fighting that instinct through charity is wise. That's STILL in their own self-interest as it gives them some sort of superiority? You know who the most unfathomable child murder is in all of history? Mother Theresa. She proclaimed to be helping these kids, then take charity and give it to the catholic church so she could buy her sainthood. It's not that she directly committed
edit: forgot the most strange part. Her stated mission was to help children get to God faster. The people that heard that assumed she meant teaching and taking care of the kids, not causing mass death and torture. Yes there was a school, what the catholic church never says is the fucking thing was empty.
Once you understand that, you'll move behind the simple-mindedness of "power/competence structures only benefit those who generate them"