> Yet, there’s a flaw at the heart of this claim. While the United States operates as a free market economy, the key agent within modern capitalism - the corporation - works more like an authoritarian state
This isn't particularly true, but where it is, it isn't a flaw. This is as designed.
Where it's true: what capitalism wants to avoid is putting "money" in with "power" (i.e. "violence" and "rules") that the state has. Companies don't have violence and only have rules in a limited sense. E.g. a company can't lock you in a box for failing to give it some of your money. Only the state can do that. Having corporations limits the blast radius of what malicious/incompetent employees can do. In a capitalist system, with enough bad decisions, your company might go bankrupt. In a communist one, with enough bad decisions, 50 million people might starve to death[0].
Where it's not true: companies exist through free agreements between people. You might argue that they aren't free enough, although that gets vague fast, but you can't opt out of the state. That's the problem with authoritarian states. You can move job. Or, if you argue that people can't move job, the problem is so much harder for moving state that the point still stands.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward
This isn't particularly true, but where it is, it isn't a flaw. This is as designed.
Where it's true: what capitalism wants to avoid is putting "money" in with "power" (i.e. "violence" and "rules") that the state has. Companies don't have violence and only have rules in a limited sense. E.g. a company can't lock you in a box for failing to give it some of your money. Only the state can do that. Having corporations limits the blast radius of what malicious/incompetent employees can do. In a capitalist system, with enough bad decisions, your company might go bankrupt. In a communist one, with enough bad decisions, 50 million people might starve to death[0].
Where it's not true: companies exist through free agreements between people. You might argue that they aren't free enough, although that gets vague fast, but you can't opt out of the state. That's the problem with authoritarian states. You can move job. Or, if you argue that people can't move job, the problem is so much harder for moving state that the point still stands.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward