Genetics are a factor in so much as neurological vulnerabilities to developing/embracing anti-social behaviors, which still have to be taught. In the case of rich elite families, this would likely be handed down through generations along with some vindictive feelings about the change. And we know empirically that engaging in capital accumulation and indeed acting as a capitalist requires anti-social behaviors. I want to be clear, anyone could become much more wealthy if they have no regard for the rights of others and understood the true mechanisms of capitalism (plus some start up capital usually, but there's always exceptions - most of which are from before neoliberal economics took over). Social connections between the dethroned families still very much exist after many of these reforms, so when capitalist structures were reintroduced, there was still a cadre of people who had been raised to be ruthless to fill the power vacuum which requires a ruling class.

The genetics piece that the poster is trying to suggest is phrenological and racist at it's core. It's a shift from the divine right of kings being ordained by God, to nature being a stand in for God to justify the idea these people are better in an immutable way. It's not informed by economic, biological, or sociological factors in any academic sense, but has a veneer of having been well researched. Actually settled research shows us otherwise - innate intelligence has no variability between demographics. The behaviors necessary to gain these levels of prominence have to be learned, and the vast majority of people find it rightfully distasteful to engage in these behaviors. It boils down to this: these people are not our betters, they were taught to be predators and how take advantage of the inherent structures of capitalism - they are class conscious, the working class is not and has actual morals - wealth and power corrupts the mind and soul.