It sounds like you're talking about what's roughly called the law of oligarchy. I see the basis for this in the dominance hierarchies of most social animal species.

I see also how the quotation, which refers to design, might suggest a conspiracy theory. But the article puts forward a broader, evolutionary perspective because, as I say, we're all to blame for this network effect, not just those at the top who may deliberately reinforce this effect (such as Zuckerberg), but the lowly users who participate in these systems. In my other writings, too, I take it to be a natural process we've been trying to transcend throughout history.

Modernity was supposed to be a break from the stagnation of quasi-animality (of theocracy, monarchy, slavery, patriarchy). But the same inequalities presented themselves in new forms (plutocracies, dictatorships, gentrified neighborhoods, starving artists, cliques of influencers, etc).

Of course, while military conflict might reshuffle the board, militaries are organized as dominance hierarchies too, with centralized command structures. Lewis Mumford called this tendency the "pentagon of power."