This isn't jaded, but is wrong insofar as its an incomplete understanding of the world or problem domain.

It would take quite a lot of studying to complete the picture, and it also requires a high level of discernment (this area often becomes a deranged quagmire on both sides), and a lot of mental gymnastics due to the high level of indirection and false methodology are needed to come to a sound conclusion.

As a TL;DR, Socialist propaganda often blames Capitalism while ignoring its own faults. Capitalism has issues as well and does the exact same.

Both versions today create a false dichotomy without provable identity (necessary for rational thought), that systems of truth seeking can then be used to identify the truth of reality. The truth is somewhat more nuanced.

Many cohorts regardless of classification engage in push-pull dynamics; you may be more familiar with the term "shock doctrine". I've heard that variations on forms for this date back to Rome.

It is impossible to have a power base within the population without a strong need. This works out in practice that a group has part of it, which calls on and publicizes the abuses of the other to engage their platform to rise up, and a small part of that group also that subverts and seeks to induce and create those same publicized problems within the other group.

So Capitalists are not necessarily Capitalists but a mixture of both, the same goes for Socialists, and the failure domains are at the edges (where the extremes of both meet).

It also works out that in modern fiat economies, dynamics with money printing can create trends that appear like Capitalism, while not meeting the requirements of such (i.e. there being a market).

This can progress right up until the market itself disappears. Participants in a market are adversarial, they do not cooperate.

Adam Smith's requirements are no longer met for the two groups involved in economies when the only participants cooperate, and when certain measures are met fiat economies collapse and become non-market Socialist economies. These then fails for a number of reasons best covered elsewhere.

So if you look closely, the problem areas are really at both of the extreme ends of the perceived groupings, and when Capitalism goes too far to the right; it becomes Socialism which structurally is just another form of statism. The fundamental underlying structure and its inherent failures are derived from the central hierarchy which any society based in statism meets as a function of structure.

Mises wrote extensively on this subject, but has largely been dismissed today without a rational basis for the dismissal.

To muddy the waters as well, there is also the problem of mass delusion.
Given the high level and number of indirection, and mental gymnastics needed to get to the bottom these things which are often more falsehood than truth, or in other words to make a correct distinction; Many cannot do this on their own as they lack the mental capabilities, wherewithal, or gumption.

Mises often refers to these people as destructionists because the outcome of blind support towards falsehood inevitably leads to destruction, especially in the cases of non-market Socialism.

Those that are deluded and delusional are quite common in all camps, which is why its important to keep a proper and rational head on these matters when discussing such things.