Facepalm

They conserve a lot of things. Choosing one that you think is bad as an example is reasonable, but it doesn't really make a point.

It's arguable (but not something I agree with) that you simply don't understand that capitalism is, because no one person is able to fully comprehend all of the unintended consequences of a system. It may be that in fact the only human compatible system that doesn't immediately decay. (Again - Obviously, I don't believe this)

A theoretical argument for this (that I don't necessarily agree with) could be that because we are hierarchical creatures, it's the only way to reasonably integrate this, via a system of social classes. But the system would have to be sufficiently performant for the lowest class, otherwise it would collapse. So perhaps the only evil in capitalism, is the manipulation and dishonesty towards the lower classes, to accept something that is not performant for them. Perhaps if the system was policed with honesty, then it might allow an interation of the system to be discovered that does not fundamentally abuse its constituents. Perhaps even, if the classes simply represented different subcultures but were fundamentally equal in the eyes of the social system?

Enough with the theoretical, the point is nuance is essential. The more we dispense with it, the more embedded, violent and dysfunctional everything becomes.

Undoing mistreatment by mistreating the mistreaters doesn't exactly set a precedent for a mistreatment free future, does it?