I think it's more appropriate to call it Corporatism now.

Capitalism, as distinct from just a market (let alone a free market) economy, is based on the idea that ownership creates value thus entitling the owners of capital to some fraction of it's production and to a lesser extent the idea that anyone-can/everyone-should be an owner (as opposed to a feudal system with hard line serf-lord/owner-renter separation)

Regulations, regulatory capture, corruption, market failures; that's all broadly orthogonal.

Yes, because any system that allows corporate entities to amass significant wealth will see those entities using that power to create and capture regulation for their own benefit. Unless a counter mechanism to mass media and bribing politicians can be created, the general public and their governmental power will inevitably be neutered by wealthy interests. Regulatory capture and monopolies are features of capitalism, not bugs.

Yes. Just like socialism is still socialism when there's corruption. See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

We need to accept that capitalism seems to be prone to problems relating to regulatory capture and find a solution that resolves these issues. The idea of a perfect and pure "capitalism" is a myth.

True. There's never has, and never will be, any "pure," utopian socialism nor libertarian anarchism, just messy reality with varying levels of gotchas, power concentrations, totalitarianism and corruption. The best people can do is diffuse power and install individuals whom are fair, reasonable and put society / greater good before personal gain... without many of these sorts of people, the crooks win and tear civil society down.

To the extent that regulatory capture is itself an inevitable outcome of capitalism, maybe.

This is the same as suggesting that organized crime is an inevitable outcome of human ambition. So sad.

You can't have regulatory capture without regulations!

That is mostly tongue in cheek of course, but it does really bring up a point in that if there were stringent controls on regulation it could help minimize the issue. And if nothing else there's some beautiful irony in regulation being in need of regulation.

Automatic, mandatory scheduled review for regulations and mandatory sunset provisions for laws would be a damn good start. It would solve a lot of social issue too.

> if there were stringent controls on regulation it could help minimize the issue

It would just shift attention to the organs of government controlling said regulation. The insight of democracy is it seeks to balance, not suppress, human nature. Capitalism and democracy healthily co-exist because the former produces the private property rights that keep state power in check. Keeping that checking function itself balanced is the crisis–and opportunity–of our modern era.