Yes, the people with the most to lose are likely to have the most power to protect it. And yet, the US has managed to pass laws that have bettered the life of the workers pretty much as abundance has made producing for workers profitable. And capitalist Europe has done even more. One can imagine laws that would improve the housing and medical situation without ending capitalism in the industry or in the economy.

If you can't argue economics from an economic perspective, does some law of nature that require you find a new tack? Maybe capitalism, under the right constitution, warts and all is optimal. Not perfect. But better than the alternatives. Maybe mending it makes more sense than ending it.

I'm not sure what you mean by "the capitalist theory of economics." Do you have a capitalist text on the subject? For me, the capitalist theory of economics has nothing to do with nouns; it's all about verbs. It's about who decides. Under capitalism, decisions are made by people with economic skin in the game. Under every other system, they are made by bureaucrats. The rest is commentary.