How corporates co-opted mindfulness to make us bear the unbearable (2015)

It's rebellion, but acceptable compared to bombing state offices or somesuch.

The great part about this is that Smith himself, never mind his contemporaries and critics of his political economy (Marx and Engels) was concerned:

"Civil government, so far as it is instituted for the security of property, is in reality instituted for the defence of the rich against the poor, or of those who have some property against those who have none at all." (From Smith's The Wealth of Nations)

Great misconceptions you mentioned indeed exist - this idea that capitalism is "people buying and selling", that capitalism is "natural", and that because it is "natural" it is therefore desirable or good.

This view generally depends on ignorance of various historical developments (such as enclosure in Western Europe) and what distinguishes capitalism from other earlier modes of production.

I've thought it strange that one might compare Smith's "invisible hand" to Hegel's "world spirit/geist", and lead to very different conclusions even by considering a force figured to be supernatural but effected through the agency of humans.

Capitalism (and relatively free trade) is the only mechanism in history to have ever pulled large quantities of people out of grinding poverty. You lament the loss of the (capitalist) mom and pop shop, where's your lament for the loss of having to plow your own field just to avoid starvation? Where's your lament for having to dig coal out of the ground with a shovel and pick just to burn to keep your home warm in the winter?

I agree that we've lost a lot of social worth in the form of our real life social networks, but the primary culprit there is government. Government guarantees you a retirement fund, savings rates plummet, and people don't bother to have enough kids to make sure they're taken care of. Government guarantees your parents an income, so you don't have to take care of them. Government feeds the poor, so there's no need for you to be involved in your community to aid your neighbor. Government destroyed the family by subsidizing divorce and single motherhood, creating broken homes which are factories for poverty and misery. But sure, the real problem is Jeff Bezos is part of the machine that is improving the standard of living for all humanity.

I'm not going to argue that capitalism does not bring benefits, it certainly does, I don't think anyone could deny that, but just because it has brought many benefits does not imply:

a.) That its negatives should be ignored or considered negligible by default. (I hear fascist states are highly organized and effcient, surely this benefit outweighs all the censorship, restrictions on freedom, etc. that often accompany this increased organization and efficiency?) b.) That it is the only system that could bring such benefits. c.) That there are no better models. d.) That history is static and the model that works today is also sufficient for the future.

Because none of these hold I think it's worthwhile to call capitalism, and other systems, into question and see if we can envision alternatives.

As far as lamenting goes--since when was it a rule that I had to approach systems with an all or nothing mentality? So because I dislike one side effect of capitalism I have to dislike all of its side effects? Huh?

Doubtless Amazon is convenient, but you cannot deny that the Amazonian dominance (hah) has indeed erased the social relationships from early capitalism that I brought up. I'm pointing out that while we gain plenty from Amazon-- convenience, comfort, reliability--we also have to remain conscious of what we lose: the human quality (faint as it was) that used to exist in economics and the exchange of capital.

Hell, you don't even have to interact with your computer anymore to order toilet paper from amazon, you press a button and its done. Or, more eerily, you talk to Alexa and more or less accept whatever she orders for you--think of the interaction this is replacing. Consider a fur dealer; a detailed discussion with a domain expert about furs and what suits your particular needs is replaced by a technological interface that is assumed to preselect (more or less) the best available option for you without any sophisticated dialogue about it. Sure, someday Alexa will probably be an expert in furs as well--but we are losing something when companies are allowed to grow to incredible size at global scale. The world does become incredibly convenient--every purchase is an amazon purchase so the familiarity makes it near impossible to screw up or be cheated or surprised--but it also reduces individuality and choice.

Your concerns about the government are certainly not unfounded. Based on my anecdotal experience they seem a little overblown but you are right to call these things into question. I'm not sure it needs to be one or the other. It's quite likely both the big G and capitalism are contributors to the world's woes. Note however, that most of the issues stemming from big government you mention are intimately tied up with the flow of capital (retirement fund, saving rates, income...)