> How about we go back to democracy and capitalism instead of trying on the Marxist hat?

We're more likely to go to neo-feudalism before either.

We already have feudalism/never got rid of it. Modern landlords are direct descendants of lords, peasants now just pay for their own security too (and of course have a concept called the State that can protect peasants against the landed class, under some conditions).

Why not Marxism and democracy?

That has been tried, but any shred of democratic process ends up giving way to collectivist control requiring a bureaucratic dictatorship. One can only conclude they are incompatible.

Why deal in abstract? Any specific examples you'd like to point to?

How is that different than the small cohort of ultra wealthy driving policy, both directly and through soft influence? It’s all sausage making, pick your flavor.

I don’t believe such a conclusion is forgone.

Our current system has objectively delivered massive economic growth and standard of living improvements.

It has delivered for the shareholder class while driving down fertility rates through unfavorable economic macros.

“Growth for whom”? Growth has proven valuable primarily to the wealthiest, who continue to demand more. Good luck with future squeezing as structural demographic declines are locked in.

https://english.kyodonews.net/news/2024/08/5e488d2474cf-japa... (Japan)

https://www.piie.com/research/piie-charts/2024/chinas-popula... (China)

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-68402139 (South Korea)

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/nchs_press_releases/2024/... (US)

Fertility rates have been decrease with improved standard of living, and the poorest have the most children. Hungary gives 5% of gdp to people who have children, yet have barely stopped the decline in births because of this. Other countries have similarly failed.

Where and when? And how is allowing capitalists horde wealth and power incompatible with democracy? I’d say having workers in more control is more democratic than the top down power structure of capitalism

Your preconceived notion that Marxism requires totalitarianism makes this opinion fall flat.

Marxist ideals don't require totalitarianism, it also doesn't require the full implementation of socialism/communism to derive some ideals to strive for a fairer society.

As another comment in this thread has posted, I recommend you to actually read the "Communist Manifesto" and see how much of it you'll actually agree with.

> How about we go back to democracy and capitalism instead of trying on the Marxist hat?

How do you suggest going about that when capital is power and power has a tendency to try to take over systems, such as democracy and exactly what's happening with oligarchies being a natural follow up from the structures of power created by capitalism itself?

You complain about Marxism ideals leading to totalitarianism but fail to see how capitalistic ideals lead to a different form of social disease. What if capitalism is incompatible with the ideals of democracy? How do we deal with that to foster another system that could combine the best of both worlds?

That's more what I think about rather than a fight between two ideologies stuck in the past...