In primitive pluralism, there was little rational design because people functioned spontaneously in accord with their cultural values and imperatives.
Ethical and religious doctrines (cf. the Indian religious epic: The Mahabharata) specify that elite-rulers should care for and protect the people. Even when there was a self-serving tendency or lapses due to character flaws in monarchs, the better traditional elites still saw their responsibility in a paternalistic way.
Self-interest played a part as well: effective kings were desirous of dynastic succession, and were genuinely concerned to hand over a wealthy and powerful state to their heirs. This type of self-interest is noticeably absent in plutocratic pluralism-II.
Plutocracy: A system of government whereby wealth and the benefits that wealth accrues lead to a concentration of power in the hands of those with disproportionate access to financial resources—in modern times: politicians and the financial sector.
Politicians have little incentive to care about the long-term effect on society, because their interests are served by short-term decisions related to elections.
Centralizing power and wealth becomes a priority. So more and more people become directly employed or indirectly dependent on the State for benefits. Businesses win padded contracts, subsidies and protection; individuals enter public service, get direct payments and receive many services.
Politicians have power to raise money and get power thereby, and they have power to spend money and get more power thereby.
Politicians use their power to get kickbacks from business, travel the world and live the good life.
Big businesses use their wealth to gain access to power, so as to gain more wealth. With more wealth, they seek more power.
Politicians use their power to gain access to more money (i.e. from members of society), so as to gain more power.
Top officials are part of this lust for power and wealth—moving between top positions in big business and in government.
Politicians erroneously regard money as wealth and cut loose its links to real things (typically gold), which might restrict the amount of government debt or issuance of bank-notes.
Don't Forget Power
As time passes, society gets ever more complex and government gets ever more elaborate, intrusive and expensive. Money isn't everything: politicians know that. There was always, and there still is the lust for power.
The drive for power to bolster the security of the political elites leads to increasing efforts to control the populace, resulting in:
increasing numbers of regulations,
invasions of privacy, especially financial,
eavesdropping on communications,
identity controls,
restrictions on movement,
surveillance,
preventing access to information about politicians,
prohibitions on demonstrations and associations,
increased powers for the police,
development of special police forces ,
trials/inquests held increasingly without juries or in private,
loss of the right to freedom from arbitrary interference,
detention on suspicion,
abolition of habeas corpus,
restriction of press freedom,
and more...
Has anyone noticed such things in their society?
The most powerful vested interests end up being:
the financial sector: the central bank, investment banks, big banks, insurance firms, pension funds, giant asset managers, property capital; &
the political classes and senior bureaucrats, who enable it all.
There is no self-restraint personally or socially within the political-financial class. There will be individuals who might wish to set a limit, but they depart or are pushed aside by others who are less squeamish. The purest political power comes from the manipulation of money within the financial sector to create an illusion of wealth for all and the reality of colossal wealth for the new elites.
Where does this end? It seems as if it can, must, and will end in one way: economic collapse and societal disaster. Most suffering will fall on the middle classes. For more in this vein: see financialization in the US and UK.