It would be a mistake to believe that those that have, are somehow pretty much the same as those that do not have. The problem with those that do not have, is that, when those that do not have, believe that their situation is well-nigh hopeless, then their viewpoint in life is often fundamentally going to differ distinctly from those that have; whereas, for those that have, typically, their main concern is the maintenance and thus the stability of the status quo, which they normally are an integral part of, for they are mainly satisfied, as things so stand. As for those that currently do not have, but believe that they have a reasonable shot of being amongst the haves, there viewpoint is often in flux, depending upon where they are in life, or expect to be. That said, the types of people that are inclined to rebel or complain, may indeed occasionally have some degree of overlap, with the have and have nots; but what the have nots are seeking is often quite different than what the haves are seeking – for the former wants their fair share; whereas, the later, wants a government that will help them to maintain their current share or status and not to improperly take it away or endanger it.
So then, when it comes to the haves, what they so know is that only an upset of the status quo could typically ever imperil them and since they do not wish for this to occur, they make it their point to see that the peace and order so required to have a civilized and thus an organized society are in their control, either directly or indirectly. After all, once a given institution or family has achieved success, the over abiding future goal of that entity is to see that it continues for as long as period of time as so possible, with as much stability as possible, as well. This thus signifies that it is always the status quo, and will always remain the status quo, that are the least likely to desire to change much of anything, and when they so actually comply with any such change, they often do so in a very slow, methodical, and reluctant way. Those that have, want peace and order, mainly because their lives are essentially quite satisfactory, and they then seldom want to take any undue risk that might therefore upset their comfortable status, because they realize that the potential upside for them is fairly limited, whereas, the downside could be for them, catastrophic.
This thus signifies, that for those that are keeping score, we thus find, that the people and institutions crying the loudest for peace and order, are always those that have a vested interest, and therefore a real good reason to want things to stay the way that they currently are. On the other hand, those that want justice, fairness, equality of opportunity, and change, are going to primarily be represented by those that represent the have nots, as well as those that are fair-minded institutions and people, and of which, some of those people will be the haves, that apparently have a conscience, which they are obedient to, for the greater good of society, at large.