Im not sure I agree. These things are relative, and I would argue that "Capitalism" is an environment that is beneficial to "competition, innovation, refinement, transformation, and others" relative to other things. Im not sure about what the "thing" is. Rule system? Laws? Societal norms? But I hope you get the idea. Things are obviously not universally perfect, but what are they in relation to other comparable things?
Also, from my econ classes, isn't capitalism fundamentally just property rights and freedom of trade? Some argue that capitalism is more specifically about gaining rent (money) through capital alone, and they criticize that this is undeserved and to the cost of others. But in my view, such criticism ignores risk of loss and potential long term changes.
The University of Chicago propagandized about free markets, but we see what was really going on in the modern economy:
Cartels and Monopolies. Everywhere. Almost all sectors are down to a 1-4 dominant companies that simply entrench themselves with regulatory protections and rent seek for revenue generation.
Even seemingly pure free market commodity markets like frozen concentrated orange juice have shadow cartels like ADM and Cargill, and billions of government assistance and price manipulation.
>Also, from my econ classes, isn't capitalism fundamentally just property rights and freedom of trade?
The core concept of capitalism, multiple individuals pooling their financial resources together for a unified purpose, seems quite logical and noble to me and certainly not inherently evil in and of itself.
I think the real problem that anti-capitalists (who I find often do not understand even what money is and where it comes from) have is that they conflate the problems resulting from corporate personhood with relatively free-market capitalism.
The concepts of private property ownership, the rule of and due process of law and habeas corpus are dramatic improvements overall in the human condition and are part of the core that makes the US in particular and as well as other "Western" countries the enviable result of such concepts.
I'm of the opinion that corporate personhood is, along with money printing outside of the scrutiny of the general populace and guided by multinational origins, an insidious "backdoor" that overrides the freedoms that result from those concepts.
I am not an economics law or political science professor or anything remotely close to that, though. I could be barking up the wrong trees but giving abstract concepts like corporations the same rights as humans seems like it screws up so many things - take political election financing as one of many examples.
Also, from my econ classes, isn't capitalism fundamentally just property rights and freedom of trade? Some argue that capitalism is more specifically about gaining rent (money) through capital alone, and they criticize that this is undeserved and to the cost of others. But in my view, such criticism ignores risk of loss and potential long term changes.