My conclusion is that it was necessary to contribute to the enlightenment of the class whose side I took, rather than to change sides. But it is somewhat disappointing to find that many of the working class, as soon as they achieve the slightest enlightenment, tend to want to get in bed with the ruling class. A little enlightenment is a dangerous thing, was my optimistic conclusion, what's needed by people like you is even more enlightenment. ;-)
[WS:] I think that the Soviet-style communism took considerable steps toward the enlightenment of the class it represented. It is amazing what the communists did to bring the "high culture" previously available only to the higher echelons of the bourgeoisie- starting from education, literature, classical music, theater, arts and down to personal appearance and hygiene- to the masses. The problem they faced was not their goals of methods, but their starting point - their masses were exceptionally backward and Herculean efforts were needed to achieve that goal.
I need to add, however, that enlightenment itself is insufficient to prevent asymmetry of power relations. This asymmetry is deeply embedded in social interaction and thus will likely emerge in any interaction, regardless of the educational and cultural level of human actors. Counteracting those asymmetries is the matter of institutional arrangements - i.e. implementing an effective system of checks and balances - rather than individual ethical or individual qualities.
Wojtek