For example, in The Shield, the cop character Shane is super racist and says the N-word, but when a Black girl is killed, Shane gets really mad and wants to find and kill the killer or bring him to justice. Some CEOs who are straight-up classist would still help their employees, and if their employee dies, they would start funds for their kids. But why? Why would people like this do something ‘good,’ especially when there isn’t anything in it for them?
Your premise assumes people are morally consistent, and that’s just not how humans work.
Someone can hold racist or classist views and still feel real anger, empathy, or a sense of justice in a specific situation. People compartmentalize constantly. Having prejudice doesn’t turn off basic emotional responses when something concrete and personal happens.
Also, it’s not true that there’s “nothing in it for them.” There are always underlying factors like personal identity, guilt, attachment, social image, or even just the need to see oneself as not completely awful.
What you’re describing isn’t a contradiction. It’s exactly what real people are like, and why well-written characters behave that way too.
One of the dumbest but best examples anyone’s given me for the inconsistencies of morality. Is video game lobbies.
You can find people who do charity work actively protest for civil rights and fight for immigrants rights. Then the load into a Dota 2 match and call the Brazilians dirty f****** slurs every 3 seconds and wish they were all deported for us servers.
The only consistency in humanity is that it’s inconsistent.