See, I would look at that as the linchpin question for capitalists.

I mean, it is the lynchpin question for capitalists as well, the origination of modern leftist thought was a critique of capitalism. They basically share all of the same questions.

And it is difficult to do, though no more difficult than our current systems. Large scale systems are always hard to manage. But how do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time. We don’t need to completely undo society to start moving towards a more equitable future.

And it is highly theoretical, no doubt about that. That’s how you start to improve anything, you theorize about solutions, impliment the best ones you can, and iterate overtime.

A hierarchical structure may not be ideal, but as with American democracy, it’s the worst thing we can think of besides everything else that has been tried.

That’s not actually true, work has been organized in a multitude of ways throughout history to various levels of effectiveness. And the outcomes of these structures have been largely situational. Saying hierarchical structures are the “least worst” is a broad generalization. Also, as I already pointed out, not all schools of leftist thought do away with hierarchy in the management of work. The only thing leftist schools of thought universally push for is changing the distribution model of value generated from said work.

Though if hierarchical structures are kept, how the hierarchy is determined is obviously usually changed as well. Given that our current model ties these decisions to the “owner” of the business, who’s status as owner would need to be removed or at least reimagined to work within the new value distribution model.

Also, I have to refute your “American Democracy is the worst thing we have tried except all the others”. That is just a thought killing statement meant to prevent discussions of better options.

We know for a fact that capitalism creates an ultra wealthy class that is comprised of a very small percentage of the population while also leaving a significant portion of the population in abject poverty. Even when it has the resources to support it’s entire population, at least at a “base necessities” level, as is the case in America.

You could argue that you don’t agree with the various solutions presented by any and all leftist (though it sounds like you really haven’t bothered to research it either), but understand that it is this inherent and unnecessary cruelty that pushes people to seek out a better system. And from a leftists point of view, every single person in poverty is a failure of the current system, every person who dies from inadequate health care coverage a reason to rework our systems, every extravagant dinner a billionaire eats while a child goes hungry proof that this system is in dire need of change.

Maybe you believe capitalism is somehow the best solution to these problems, and that we could do no better, that we truly have reached the “end of history”, but I doubt it. But if you think we could do more to help people, then you too might be more of a leftist than you realize.

And while most of us on the “far left” would love to see a future where we do away with the capitalist class, most of us would settle for health care and school lunches in the near future for now.