I would agree with you that the Pareto Distribution, widely popularized by Jordan B. Peterson, is a real phenomenon. After all, when one has much, it is inherently easier to acquire more.
However, simply because a pattern exists does not mean it must then by allowed to act unchallenged or unmitigated. Just as there are many “natural forces” within ourselves and society which we harness for a higher purpose, so can the “force of nature” that the Pareto Distribution and free market represents be harnessed for the collective good, rather than to serve only the few who benefit when it goes unregulated.
I think a great correlate example which illustrates this is monogamy. Before monogamy, it’s thought that we were more or less polygamous apes, in which the Pareto Distribution would have ensured that only the few males considered most desirable would have been able to reproduce. When we created monogamy, we essentially “democratized” or “socialized” reproduction, in a sense, ensuring that everyone got a chance. This likely also allowed a variety of traits to emerge and flourish, thereby increasing our genetic diversity.
In other words, as sentient and rational beings, we have the capacity to choose how best to use the forces of nature, like the Pareto Distribution, to serve what we value most, rather than simply saying “Welp, that’s nature, guess we just get to all be ruled by a few aristocrats.”