Now, whether or not what we have can rightly be called capitalism is another question entirely.
On that point, see this:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=495527.msg5656763#msg5656763
Zarathustra is conflating the ill effects of debt and tangible capital (which is actually inertia and liability, not assets) with the gains in prosperity that all arise from technology and human ingenuity.
His assertion (I deleted the nonsense post) that knowledge can't prosper in a decentralized society (a.k.a. anarchy) is unfathomably incorrect. It is so incorrect, that he should not be included in the discussion here, because it is just noise which buries the important discussion in this thread.
I've told him by private message that if he can make comments without making a long quotation of the prior post, then I will allow his comments if they don't just repeat the same nonsense without any sufficient citation or factual backup. I don't want to bury this thread in nonsense.
If he feels that is censorship, then fine he can create his own thread. I rarely have to delete posts, but he goes on and on and on with the same nonsense asserting there can be no sharing of knowledge and no network effects once we have decentralization.
His thinking is the antithesis of everything the internet has done and brought to us.
He is correct that the complexity of the power vacuum of socialism is collapsing. But his mistake is conflating that collapse with the rise of decentralization, which is actually a knowledge networking effects phenomenon.
If you get that wrong, you've got everything wrong. It is that important.
P.S. my personal apology to him for being forced to delete his nonsense posts. It is not personal. I am just keeping the thread signal-to-noise ratio high. I have allowed silly posts of others to remain, because they didn't go on and on and on post after post.