Given an equal (initial) opportunity, political motivations diverge along pereto distribution in talent, risk aversity and industriousness.
The top 20% own 80% of capital, and want capitalism.
The bottom 80% own 20% of capital, and want socialism.
In pure democracy, socialism would always win. Luckily, the top 20% always fudge the 30% of the vote with vote buying, pitting the bottom 80% one against another, pretty much all the tactics frequently ascribed to jews (who do indeed excel at it, but aren't the only ones).
Now and then, mass chimp out happens, and some genius has idea to start with real communism on square 1. Needless to say it doesn't last, as communism utterly disenfranchises the "top" 20% kulaks, leaving the economy uncompetitive. So things quickly fall back to optimal pereto economic pattern of cumulative advantage and capital derived master/slave relationship.
While the pereto game is far from nash optimal, it's the best you can get with only vaguely cooperative agents of global market. Socialism works better in small tribal settings - altruistic cooperation is far more consistent and the top 20% are motivated for the sake of their near kin.