Chrystia Freeland is the federal member of parliament for Toronto Centre and the author of Plutocrats: the Rise of the New Global Super-Rich and the Fall of Everyone Else.

Earlier this year, the most reliable way for a billionaire to make the headlines was to compare suggested tax increases to Nazi Germany. Lately, though, the more interesting shift in the politics of the plutocracy has been more genteel.

There will be more Hitler analogies, of course, but another camp among the superrich is starting to tack in the opposite direction. Some plutocrats accept the evidence that capitalism is no longer working for the middle class, and are trying to figure out what to do about that.

Story Continued Below

It is not just George Soros, the hedge-fund billionaire, who cheerfully describes himself as a class traitor and has been worrying about the shortcomings of what he calls free-market fundamentalism for decades, anymore. Among the plutocrats, this once-radical perspective is going mainstream.

You could see that in London in late May, at a conference on “Inclusive Capitalism.” In the graceful, gilded rooms of the Guildhall, the historic seat of the City, one of the world’s two centers of finance, international investors controlling $30 trillion worth of asset–one third of the global total—gathered to discuss, as Paul Polman, the CEO of Unilever, put it, “the capitalist threat to capitalism.”

Capitalism, Polman and Lynn Forester de Rothschild, the conference’s organizer, wrote in an introductory essay, “has often proved dysfunctional in important ways. It often encourages shortsightedness, contributes to wide disparities between the rich and the poor, and tolerates the reckless treatment of environmental capital. If these costs cannot be controlled, support for capitalism may disappear.”

That was just the curtain-raiser. The discussion was kicked off by Fiona Woolf, Lord Mayor of the City of London, who warned that capitalism needed to be “for all, not just the gilded few.” Next up was Prince Charles—yes, that Prince Charles—who said the triumphalism of capitalism when the Soviet Union collapsed had been a mistake and that “the long-term job of capitalism is to serve people, rather than the other way around.”

The morning’s keynote address was delivered by Christine Lagarde, managing director of the International Monetary Fund. She quoted both Karl Marx’s prediction that capitalism “carried the seeds of its own destruction,” and Pope Francis’ characterization of increasing inequality as “the root of social evil.” She came out against a favorite centrist reaction to rising inequality—“that ultimately we should care about equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome.” The problem, Madame Lagarde said, was that opportunity could never be equal in a deeply unequal society. She called for more progressive income tax systems and greater use of property tax.

These prescriptions may be par for the course for the populists who swept Bill de Blasio to City Hall after 12 years of Mike Bloomberg’s plutocratic reign, or for supporters of Elizabeth Warren, the crusading liberal senator from Massachusetts. But they came from the managing director of the IMF, whose organization has long been the villain in the anti-globalization movement’s worldview, the fiendish mastermind of the plutocracy’s “shock doctrine” efforts to take over the planet. That narrative is still alive and well—Lagarde declined an invitation to be this year’s commencement speaker at Smith College after students and faculty protested she should not have been invited because the IMF was “a corrupt system” that fueled the oppression and abuse of women worldwide.

At Guildhall, the day ended with a dinnertime keynote speech by another one of the architects and watchdogs of global capitalism, Mark Carney, governor of the Bank of England. He said that rising income inequality was real and international: “Within societies, virtually without exception, inequality of outcomes both within and across generations has demonstrably increased.” He refuted the popular centrist argument that this is all about meritocracy: “Now is the time to be famous or fortunate.” And he warned, with strong language, that the capitalist system was at risk: “Just as any revolution eats its children, unchecked market fundamentalism can devour the social capital essential for the long-term dynamism of capitalism itself.”

The spectacle of plutocrats eating porcini risotto in a Georgian mansion and bemoaning the excesses of capitalism cries out for Tom Wolfe—one British hack made a start in that direction by quipping to his peers that the gathering would more aptly have been called a meeting about “exclusive capitalism.”

But that was precisely the point—and why the conference, and the broader trend it is a part of, matter. Most of the Inclusive Capitalism conference was off the record, but its invitation-only attendees were a roll call of the global plutocracy, including Google executive chairman Eric Schmidt, Blackstone co-founder and CEO Stephen Schwarzman, and the CEOs of UBS, GlaxoSmithKline, Dow Chemical and Honeywell.

There are other signs of this shift. Social finance, which takes into account social and environmental goals, is moving from a niche into the mainstream—$1 trillion were invested in social finance funds in the United States in 2012, a five-fold surge from $202 billion in 2007. Sallie Krawcheck, a former senior executive at Citigroup and at Bank of America, who in June opened an index fund focused on companies with a greater number of women in top jobs and on their boards. She said the goal was to have a social impact while earning a fair investment return. Some other business leaders, in industries you might not expect to have much of a social conscience, are starting to support public policy that would raise their costs in the short term. They include the CEO of McDonalds, who in a little-noticed speech in May said “McDonald’s will be fine” if the minimum wage were to rise.