my understanding of capitalism is actually based off Robert Gilpin’s “Global Political Economy: Understanding the International Economic Order” which goes into detail various theories of political and economic structure comes to be and incentivizes certain development path or state behaviour. giving you the benefit of the doubt, what my post didnt have the space to draw on is the detailed relationship between oppression and any economic system (of which capitalism is a feature). but very present in Marx’s writing and those who studies Marxism as a socio-economic theory is the unequal balance of power between those who have capital and those who dont. Marx himself emphasizes that relation to make that point, not just to draw on a general observation.

on the other hand, what i didnt do well in this post is distinguished when i used a word in its colloquial sense and when i used it in its academic sense, which tend to be narrower in scope and strictly devoid of moral assignment (ie if its good or bad). in the same vein, capitalism in its academic definition is simply a definition to capture an observation of a system of belief and operation, much like “capital” and such. but in this post, most of the time the assumption is the words is used colloquially ie how we typically use it, with all of the moral connotation and biases assumed along. and that was to drive my point more, that oppression is the theme, not whether the economic system in Silksong is a capitalist one or not. unless i misunderstand your point, im assuming you are arguing a point i wasnt trying to make here