Eugyppius says:

At first it seemed strange to me, that capital should be woke, but in retrospect capital has wanted to be woke for a long time, and in fact it makes a great deal of sense. Wokeness is just the leftist drive for equality and tolerance without the confiscatory/ redistributionist/ socialist economic program. Of course it is kind of unexpected, how amenable and attractive capital finds leftism to be, once it has been denuded of everything it had to say about money and property and the means of production. Leftism was supposed to be the death of capital, but now that capital is allowed to be leftist and keep its money, leftism is everything that capital wants. The reasons seem to be the usual boring ones: Leftists have become natural supporters of immigration and feminism and open borders; and all of these things keep wages low and ensure the unimpeded flow of capital and labor all over the place.

Now that capital is woke — now that, like the borg, it has assimilated its opposition, namely various flavors of socialist leftist labor activism — it can turn on its historical enemy, which was once organized labor but has become, broadly, the native overwhelmingly white working class. Thus a high-low alliance has formed, between the new urban managerial cohorts on the one hand (the SWPL-types who manage the large corporations, rather than own them; the professoriate; a great part of the clergy; doctors and lawyers; etc.); and the restive underclass minorities and recent immigrants who hope to appropriate the social and economic position of the native (white) blue collar population. This high-low alliance is manifest, in part, as a pervasive anti-whiteness, as the top and the bottom try to join forces to culturally malign, vilify and marginalize working-class people.

Thus it has become black slaves who built this nation, whereas in the middle years of the 20th century, you were far more likely to hear that it was (white) factory workers who built American industry. Of course that was also far nearer the truth.

Becoming more speculative, and drawing a bit on Sam Francis, I think what has happened in the modern world is that the traditional three-tier class system (upper, middle, lower) has been replaced by a five-tier system that looks like this:

1) Upper classes: same as before, aristocrats and owners of capital
2) Upper managerial classes: the people who actually run corporations, as opposed to owning them
3) The traditional middle class
4) The native working class (mostly white)
5) The serfs: mainly newly arrived immigrants and other racial minorities

The big change is that 1) the upper class ceased to directly managed capital and became content with distant ownership, as 2) the upper managerial classes took over the day-to-day operations of corporations and thus a great part of society. Meanwhile decades of mass immigration and an increasingly fake service economy have brought in a load of 5) serfs who provide seasonal agricultural labor, clean your hotel room, etc.

The upper managerial classes,a cosmopolitan urban elite long opposed to nativist tendencies, political inclinations, etc. among the heretofore 3) middle and 4) working class (increasingly collapsed into each other as wages are driven downwards), have allied themselves with the serfs. Ideally this lower serf class would totally replace the troublesome, reactionary, uncooperative, ignorant, underconsuming, Trump-supporting etc. middle and working classes, which upper management hopes will lead to an economic utopia (really a dystopia) in which everybody just buys their products all the time.