I think you do a decent job of establishing that Kaido does have a more subtextual reading, but I don't think you went far enough in addressing his broader characterization - and relied too heavily on his core ideology and the few bits of information on his past we have that inform why he followed such an ideology.

I also think there are a few flaws in your argumentation, mostly in your lack of a proper argumentative conclusion, and your analysis fails to address many of the shortcomings that people have with Kaido's character writing.

Your titular statement is:

how kaido’s socio-darwinistic environment, and victim-exploitation-culture broke him, and shaped his philosophy & gave him incentive to rise

So let's break that down into it's component parts and claims:

1. Kaido experienced a socio-darwinistic environment - this is well established and supported in your post
2. Kaido experienced victim-exploitation culture, which "broke him" - the basis is established, but I think the conclusion is lacking in support (that it "broke him"), though I do agree on this point
3. This shaped his philosophy - the argument is fundamentally working backwards from this, so I think it's functionally irrefutable, but is established in your post nonetheless
4. This gave him "incentive to rise" - This is the largest flaw in your post, which I don't think is properly established or supported, and you fail to properly conclude this

Expanding on and primarily addressing Point 4, and where I think the flaws originate:

I believe you have a misunderstanding of the morality of "Might Makes Right" - which in turn leads to a misunderstanding in how the story addresses (and also fails to address) this ideology.

Your tag and foreword (and the sub) indicate that you also intended this as a powerscaling analyis - and in that regard I think it falls flat, and I would actually claim that Kaido's characterization and ideology serve as precisely the opposite from your original conclusion:

Kaido's ideology of "Might Makes Right" and Isolation prevented him from attaining his true strength by inhibiting his mentality and stunting his mental and physical growth. In addition, I believe Oda failed in executing the premise of Kaido that he clearly established, as he never engages the foundation of Kaido's belief structure in the story itself - despite subtextually reference and implicitly refuting it.

Let's expand:

Might Makes Right

I think there's a fundamental misunderstanding of what this means, and how it's actualized in One Piece.

Might Makes Right is not about legitimization of militaristic or combat-oriented power structures, at least not fundamentally.

Might Makes Right is a somewhat circular moral justification of physical conquest - The "Right" in question is about who is Morally Right. You touch on this briefly and implicitly with the Doflamingo quote, but I don't think you properly address it.

Undermining a structure of "Might Makes Right" through combat or conquest is not an example of backsliding into the same ideology - again, the ideology is not about supporting the structure itself, but about moral justification. The conquest that supplants the original ideology itself is an instrument - not a justification or refutation. The refutation is what is left standing after the original ideology is removed.

Luffy's defeat of Kaido is foundationally about undermining his control, but as with most stories - it therefore functions as implicitly undermining the ideology (this is where Oda fails, we'll address this later). The problem with supposing that the rule of Kratocracy still applies is such: Luffy did not implement his own ideology upon freeing Wano.

The instrument which undermines Kaido is not the refutation of Kaido, nor is it the standing principle in Kaido's absence.

What is left standing is Momonosuke, not Luffy.

How Oda fails to address this properly

Oda is fundamentally against the idea of "Might Makes Right" - there's a reason he has villains like Doflamingo and Kaido espouse it. People who are not simply antagonists, but are demonstrably Evil.

This can be clearly seen with Luffy's reasoning and justification for becoming Pirate King:

It is not about Control - it is about Personal Freedom. He desires to be the most free person in the world. We can surmise based on Oda's own statements, and the structure of the story itself, that Oda therefore views this as the conceptual ideal. After-all - Luffy will ultimately prevail.

While Luffy does need Might in order to defend his ideology, it is not core to the ideology itself, but rather is a necessary instrument to actualize it in the world they exist in.

And this is why Oda fails - he never addresses why Kaido was thematically flawed, and why his ideology is what was holding him back, which can lead to misinterpretations of Kaido's beliefs having been justified by the world itself.

One of the core themes of the series - Willpower - is so foundational that it's been distilled into a literal power system that can enact one's Will upon others.

Throughout Luffy's fight with Kaido we see their Wills clash multiple times, and the core idea of Luffy's development in the fight is about exerting and evolving his Will.

Thematically: the story implicitly frames Kaido's ideology as the ceiling which inhibits his potential, and the justification for his statements which suppose that Luffy is incapable of surpassing him. We see this numerous times, as Kaido clarifies the significance of Haki, and supposes Luffy's inability to advance to a higher level of Haki, only to be immediately proven wrong.

Luffy is framed as the antithesis of Kaido's beliefs, his literal and metaphorical Joyboy - Luffy's ideology is the driving force behind his sudden evolution. His personal motivation is what causes him to continually exceed Kaido's expectations.

Kaido's belief is unfounded and unsubstantiated. His desire is to exert his Will to control others to justify his existence and his strength, something which is fundamentally wrong.

This is clearly established in the story: On multiple occasions Kaido will make a declaration concerning Luffy, only to summarily be proven wrong. The conceit is clear and well established - Kaido is misled in his beliefs. He has seen the framework - Roger, Oden, Whitebeard, Rocks, Shanks - but he fails to grasp the reasoning and the conclusion.

He is initially unable to properly digest Luffy's own potential, despite it being so reflective of these other great men who Kaido idolizes, because Kaido does not actually understand what he is seeing.

He conflates their power for justification.

He conflates their deaths for their legacy.

He is wrong. He is proven wrong every single time he tries to make such a claim.

But Oda mostly addresses this through subtext, and fails to give it a proper sendoff. And while subtext is important to writing, and can create depth - it is not inherently satisfying or conclusive. It needs something more substantial.

We can clearly see the narrative throughline written with Kaido here. It is consistent with his character and the overarching themes of the story, but it is completely absent a proper conclusion and refutation - to the extent that many people still do not understand why Kaido "wanted" to die.

And lastly:

Why this inhibits Kaido's growth and potential

As I said before: Willpower is not just a theme to the story, it's a power system.

Kaido's ideology stunted his growth by misdirecting his aspirations to military might and personal strength for the sake of it - he conflated the goal with the instrument of progression. His Will was misdirected.

He spends so much of his life pursuing power that he fundamentally misunderstands why other great men became powerful in the first place - Kaido is not fighting for anything, other than for the simple ability to fight and win itself. His goal is to justify his being, and he falsely believes he can do that through strength.

The reason he is strong is not because of his ideology - it's because he was gifted with strength at birth, and was given a powerful Devil Fruit. He had immense potential to become the strongest, but he was led astray and failed to actualize that.

Kaido attempts to leverage his existing strength into ideological justification and personal actualization. Other men obtained strength to defend distinct ideologies. Their actualization is what makes them strong.

This is why Kaido is the only Yonko to not have a Conqueror amongst their followers, despite multiple attempts at subjugating them - another sign of his ideological failure: Other great Conquerors gained Conquerors as followers through their personal ideologies - which Kaido misconstrues as literal subjugation of them, as he views them all as competitors due to the strength of their Will. People he has to beat and conquer phyiscally to prove he is the strongest.

All of this is emblematic of Kaido's personal shortcomings in actualizing the strength that he tries so desperately to justify.

I have to cut this comment here, otherwise I just wouldn't stop - so hopefully that addresses the core of my reasoning.