Socialism was designed to deal with the simple hierarchies of the industrial age, a world of 2 parties, 3 networks, 2 sides of a political spectrum. The increase in complexity overwhelmed its capacity to react. The market on the other hand could adapt.
Once the networked world got going, where any two arbitrary points could transact, the existing institutions suddenly faced a severe challenge. When the elites pushed for a global world they were unwittingly creating an existential crisis for themselves.
All the 5 year plans and elite-derived grand visions faced instant obsolescence under the impact of latent variables and stochastic perturbations that are inherent in any complex system.
If you can't isolate a system, especially a complex one, you can't control it. You can adapt, but that makes your 'vision' contingent on what the future brings. And the future is, by definition, surprise.
The political structures of the populist era will be adaptive; they will focus more on learning than controlling. Humanity is not in control. For two centuries we thought we could be, but that may be revised.
My guess is that the future role of government will increasingly be the expansion and maintenance of infrastructure rather than command. Political decisions will be a property of system state rather than something decided by a Great Leader.
In fact our long peace since WW2 may be substantially due to the fact that no one can live without the sea lanes, air lanes, fiber optic cables, the financial system, GPS, Internet. Its preservation is true consensual governance.
What really needs to be done is change the incentive structure of bureaucrats away from exercising political power to maximizing revenue from transactions. Their take should increase with the rise in the economy and fall correspondingly.
