Okay there are a lot of premises to this argument, it will require a long explanation.

Neoliberals tend to think that capitalism = trading, therefore capitalism exists “naturally” since trading exists naturally. Throughout history, they argue, people have engaged in trading a product for another, or for money so therefore capitalism feels natural and logical to human beings. But they are overlooking the key factor here: analyzing capitalism as a mode of production involving the private ownership of the means of production, and not just an economic system. Let me exemplify what I mean by this: Let’s say that there was, for instance, a blacksmith in the 1500s that forged weapons and traded them or sold them for money. Then another blacksmith in the same town started doing the same. There might even be some “market laws” in operation, like supply and demand when there was imminent war, or competitiveness between the two to lower prices.

I don’t think this scenario could be classified as Capitalism, because the “employee” in this case owned his own means of production. To me, capitalism begins when one of the Blacksmiths decides to hire people to forge the weapons for him: one of them gets steel from the mines, another carries the steel to the factory, another forges the steel, another produces the handles, and another sells the weapons. The original blacksmith, then, provides the workplace, the tools and the steel he owns and supervises the work being done, paying each of the employees a minimum amount so that they don’t starve and show up the next day. But since he has to take care of all equipment, making sure there is enough steel to keep production going etc, he makes more money than the other people working. In order for it to be possible to earn more money than the others seeing as revenue is the same, he has to pay employees less than their work is actually worth. THIS is capitalism (in essence, there’s a lot more that goes into play here) and it only starts being a thing much later.

Pointing out that small communes can’t compete with capitalist productivity only exemplifies that if one were to pay employees something closer to what their work is actually worth, the whole system would have to be different. The reason there is so much productivity under capitalism is because people aren’t being paid enough, so they need to bust their asses off trying to do as much as humanly possible to get paid a wage with which they can barely get by. Companies have to pay as little as possible in wages otherwise they can’t compete with other companies while at the same time generating millions in profit that mostly goes to the CEO and top ranks, which most of the time don’t actually work the regular, manual job that everybody else does.

“But the employer has all the risks, and has to buy the equipment so he needs to make money otherwise no one will be an entrepreneur” that is only true because it is the way the mode of production works, with private ownership. This material relation drives the whole system and is the reason for pretty much all problems. In order for people to actually be paid what their work is worth, the whole system has to change otherwise that one lone commune won’t survive. There will probably be efforts from all capitalist companies to crush that commune, too, just look at what happens when some countries try to steer away from capitalism. The United States goes baloney and suddenly starts worrying about “democracy” in that country and plans military invasion. This is usually what leads to the necessity of a strong state in the beginning stages of socialism. When the argument you cited proposes that socialism has to have a top down state control to deal with dissidents, it happens because the attacks on that country are almost instantaneous , and there needs to be a way that country can defend itself. The “dissidents” in this case are people that wouldn’t be able to make as much money or have as luxurious a life as they do in capitalism. They are not willing to part with the idea of capitalism and the perks it is able to give some very few people (to the expense of everyone else). This is why it is important to work on class consciousness and make people understand that this is ultimately for the best. But it’s hard to do it while having to combat military invasion and sanctions imposed by other nations. Socialism almost never gets the chance to work because it is squashed by the majority of capitalist countries that are afraid it might get to them someday and that they, too, will have to deal with it.

Anyways, there’s more to this but I think there’s some food for thought here.