The early Roman Republic was a model for the US in the 1700's.
What happened to the Roman Republic was the wealthy got very wealthy. They found that it was easier to import cheap foreign labor (slaves) to do the work of their farms and industry than to employ Roman citizens. The citizens increasingly relied on government benefits in order to get by, and would vote for anybody who promised them better benefits.
The Romans allowed uncontrolled immigration into their territory by the barbarians, and allowed the barbarians into their Army. When a need came to fight, the barbarians in the Roman Army had no inclination to fight against their own kinsmen, and the taxpayers of Rome had no inclination to raise the money to defeat the barbarians, figuring the problem wouldn't affect them in their own lifetimes.
The rest is history. Don't think the parallels aren't here
I'll admit you make a solid argument.
The main difference is the access to wealth.
Even our "slaves" may attain wealth in a short time with luck and hard work.
Dynamic capitalism will outpace socialism, thus refreshing each generation.