"Begs a question, how would we rule if we did have a truly equal society?"
Pretty close to the definition of philosophy..
The problem with the definition, though it is a good one, is power. Power is subjective. For instance charisma is a relative neologism when applied to leadership. Some people can just lead and we describe them as charismatic but don't necessarily understand how they do it.
Even in the extremes power is subjective. You can't read a presidential or prime ministerial memoir without noticing it's more about what they couldn't do. Politics is the art of the possible but even when our leaders are sure that they know what to do they are generally frustrated in some way or other. Many presidents have described the office as a bit like being in a straightjacket.
Still people recognise power and roughly agree on who has it. For instance in New York recently a real estate broker was listed as the most powerful person, above Michael Bloomberg though he undoubtedly has power. In a very crowded and expensive city merely being at the centre of things, at the nexus of power is in itself a source of power.
In general we tend to underestimate our own power and over estimate other's. Take income, if you earn over £30k a year then believe it or not you're probably in the top 1% worldwide. Wealth is more skewed, you'd need well over £500k. To be top 1% in America alone you'd have to be a multi millionaire.
Also people intuit and feel shifts of power more than power itself. Anyone sane would consider the media to be people in a unique position of power, though with readership and viewers falling, people increasingly ignoring the dead tree press and events such as the one we just witnessed you won't find many journalists who think they are powerful, quite the opposite.
MP's sound powerful, though in actuality they just toe the party line which robs them of the power their constituents think they have. CEOs have power, but it's constrained by their need to act in favour of shareholders or the workforce.
People aspire to power so they look up enviously, and rarely down to realise where they actually are. Draw a triangle and ask someone where they fit in the pyramid of power and they tend to put themselves on the bottom when in actuality merely being in the UK puts you somewhere in the top 10%.
Power and influence though is something which flows out from a centre. A capital city, a journal, a company, it's all about interpersonal relationships. A word in the ear of someone who has power can fix your problem, much easier if they live close and you know them.
So where is the most powerful place on earth? Almost certainly New York. Does that make a real estate broker the most powerful person on earth? No, she's an enabler. New York billionaires might covet thy neighbour's apartment, she can enable that which allows them to display their power in a prestige location. They have different priorities for their power.
What about Washington DC, surely they feel all powerful. Well no, even in financial terms. The vast majority who work vaguely for the government aren't millionaires and the local schools etc are ferociously expensive. Those who advise the President maybe? Do they feel powerful? Again no, their primary function is actually to take a bullet for him whether they advised on the matter or not.
So who does that leave? Who actually has power unconstrained by responsibility? The lobbyists in short. Greasy haired non governmental wonks whose job is to get the ear of someone in power and represent a client, usually a large firm or a government. Their power is purely through their contacts, they know the chair of the paperclip counting committee and a steel maker wants to get a government paperclip contract.
Of course they have to be close to the politicians who matter, and politicians like getting elected to stuff, so as well as being lobbyists they also fundraise for them, organise them and help out with their political parties. The steel maker will pay them a fee, but a hefty donation to their favourite super pac would grease the wheels more.
Of course it goes beyond that. Cousin with the same surname arrested for assault? That journo from the x network will keep it quiet if we give him an exclusive. I'm interviewing x candidate tomorrow, what would you like me to ask him? That journalist will get some favour in the future, access or tipped off on a story. 3rd presidential debate next week and I know the questions that will be asked, same favours returned. Your candidate in a caucus struggling against another candidate from the same party? Lets leak this story, doesn't matter if it's true.
In Obama's first term green subsidies worth hundreds of billions of dollars were given out, how much would the recipient firms pay in fees and donations to secure a slice of that?
How much would Wall Street pay to ensure they'd get bailouts worth simply staggering amounts of money? Who knows but they chose Obama's cabinet for him.
What if one of these lobbyists was actually an ex President?
How much would Qatar pay for a world cup to host? How much would they pay to ensure a gas pipeline between themselves and Europe? How much would the Russians pay, as they currently supply Europe, to ensure that Qatar couldn't possibly build a pipeline through Syria? Now imagine that Qatar and Iran share the same gas field and whoever gets it out of the ground first gets the lions share of the money. How about if this gas field were the largest deposit of hydrocarbons yet found on the planet? £100 billion a year production and ramping up by the month?
Well these questions are paid for as much in blood as in money, but that a different but related topic.
Oh and all the above is writ large in the wikileaks emails...