When Capitalism 'Governs', the 'Form of Government' is Autocratic.

When Capitalism 'Governs', the 'Form' of Government is Autocratic, or, simply, Dictatorial. The 'end product' of Capitalism is 'more and more of the same', viz., Profits and Money. Its a 'quantitative Goal' achievable only by a huge increases in Profits, Money, and Size. Capitalism has no place for Freedom and Equality. Freedom and Equality 'motors' a Real Democracy. A 'Real' Individual is not 'Free' to compete with a 'Legal Fiction', called a 'Business Corporation'; nor is a Real S/HE Equal to the 'task'. When the 'Reins' of Government are taken over by an 'Economy', you will notice an 'increase' and a 're-shuffling' in 'Trade Policies', Tax reductions for the 'Business Corporate Structure', and increases in 'some areas' of 'money circulation'; but you 'will not see' an increase in the Minimum Wage. Oh, you will see and hear statements of 'more Jobs' for the 'Worker Bees', but its the 'Legal Fictions' (corporations) that are getting 'Fatter and Fatter'. The 1%-er's get 'Fatter and Fatter' until the 1% holds all the Medium of exchange. In other words, the so-called 99% no longer hold any 'Medium of exchange'; they just manage to survive, and the Political result will be a Plutocracy, or at least an Oligarchy. The Irony is that a 'Political entity', with Power at the Top, doesn't need 'Profits and Money' to 'function effectively'. It already has 'Power at the Top'. That's the 'Nature' of Political Entities. Oh, it needs money to establish 'social entities' and 'functions', but it doesn't need the 'whole ball of Wax'. If Capitalism Governs, the People at the Bottom, still need 'Monies' and 'social Institutions' to 'have a good life'. Maybe its time to try a 'Real Socialism', not the kind of Socialism practiced by most Nations where the Nation owns the 'means of Production'; or even where the 'People' purportedly own the Means of Production;( That sounds like a 'Legal, Governmental, Fiction' also.) . I've said that the term "Social" is Too General, vague, indefinite, and nebulous. Instead of using that term why not use 'the condition of togetherness'. In such a Term, the Real Individual doesn't lose his/her 'Individuality' as a 'Real Human Being'. The term applies to the 'Condition of togetherness' as an 'Entity'; of course, it can be called 'Social', so long as the Real Individual does not lose His/Her Real Individuality. Each Individual retains His/Her Individuality in the 'Condition'; it does not include Corporations because they are 'Legal Fictions' that only exist in 'contemplation of Law'. Its time to understand that Government would not exist but, for, the 'Many People' at the Bottom.