Do you mean that both systems are top down and bureaucratic?
There’s that. Market choices in both major versions of capital were often dictated by central plan or bank apparatus and supplemented by non-democratic and non-market-responsive firm decision behaviour.
At the firm level in both social organisations worker spontenaity was ground beneath the wheel of non responsive and dictatorial management.
Yet unemployment wasn’t a functional discipline. Instead the threat of bad work was used to keep good work workers under control.
Socially both systems had delegitimised themselves with bad political choices and a failure to fulfill core internal promises.
Unlike the 73-89 market cycle in both states, the working class believed that things had been getting better since ~1941 and ought to do so, that they deserved better, their society promised better, but failed to fulfill its promise. The working class had hope, and effective tactics to an extent in public protests and sit in strikes.
The maximal extent of working class activity failed against state intervention with armed forces.