And that is exactly why you are often rewarded specifically for being stupid in capitalism.
He's rewarded specifically for having broad appeal (intelligence doesn't have broad appeal sadly). I imagine incredibly aggressive marketing played a role too.
Many people who are reasonably intelligent are socialists, but almost all top-tier geniuses are socialists.
I agree with the first point, yet your second point would require a citation.
There has never been any form of capitalism other than plutocracy except for very small, isolated cases that never last. This is not just the current iteration, what you are seeing is the norm for capitalism.
This is because the current iteration of capitalism is permissive of legal bribery of politicians, and political campaigns need financing. Change that and the wealthy don't rule, for how could they rule without any hold over politicians?
Capitalism was created by wealthy people who already had wealth
The idea of free exchange and private property isn't anything but natural. Even under monarchism and feudalism people owned property and could freely trade.
The thing about all those things you mentioned is that your ability to profit from them depends on how much profit you already have.
You mean because wealth begets wealth?
How can there be free exchange when wealth essentially determines the level of freedom you have?
How does it? What freedoms do the wealthy enjoy that the poor don't?
What good are property rights if they allow a handful of robber-baron types to own all the important land and resources
This is why we break up monopolies. If you earn the money you can buy land and resources.
How do you "own your own labour" when you are in the working class and a large portion of the wealth you produce is stolen by someone
You choose to sell your labour to who you want for the price you negotiate.
who may or may not have worked a single day in their life and may or may not have had the money to start a business simply by inheriting wealth? Capitalism has a hidden caste system embedded deep within it. When you are handed wealth and opportunities as a result of having wealthy parents, you can start businesses and make a profit much more easily
Then their parents earned that wealth. Do you disagree with inheritance as a concept? Will you leave your children nothing?
when you are born into poverty or even into the middle class the ones who currently occupy the beorgiosie position will have you by the balls working for them 9/10 times and you will never have the chance to own your own labour.
Why? For example, you could make a YouTube channel, or start washing windows in your local area, or get a degree and give people financial advice etc. You have every opportunity to start your own business or be self-employed. Moreover, even if you choose to sell your labour, you still own it, or you wouldn't have had the option to sell it. Let me ask you this, if you had £50,000 cash how would you use it to make more money? I'm sure you will have a good answer, given how easy you believe it is to make money with money.
Socialism has only been implemented a handful of times, and it's failures in those cases are not inherent to the system itself but due to many factors which I would be happy to point out if you have any specific examples in mind.
You've proven my point. According to you, when socialism has issues it's not inherent to socialism but when capitalism has issues it's inherent to capitalism. Even when it's been clearly explained how the issues you raise could be fixed within the framework of capitalism.
Most of the time though, when a nation is called socialist, that is either a lie on the part of the ones implementing the system used to sneak in a fascist regime under the guise of a movement for equality
This seems a common thread with socialist regimes, which makes one wonder if it's something inherent to socialism. This links to (socialist) Orwell's belief that many socialists don't love the poor, they simply hate the rich.
