> Arguably it means that the people who own the capital should control the lion's share of political power

The ideology, such as it is, doesn't have to explicitly say that capital should have political power. It merely says that it's a moral outrage to prevent the rich from spending their money however they choose.

But the ideology is secondary to capital anyway. If we let the rich get rich enough, that's strong incentive for inventing ideological justifications for it; after all to be friends with the powerful gives an easy life, and to be their enemy give a hard one.