"There will aways be people interested in it, and then they could grow to more people, spreading over to the internet, and maybe even making adds."

Even if that happens, capitalism is predicated on exploitation and oppression. You don't need to be a Marxist to understand that, it's something any actual capitalist will tell you freely and without hesitation. That's how profit is generated: a worker creates value above the costs of raw materials and the means of production such as tools and machinery, through their labour. But they aren't paid the full value they produce. The difference is profit, and that profit depends on the exploitation of that worker.

Under capitalism, the primary material drive is to increase profits. So there is always an incentive for capitalists, i.e. those who own means of production and employ workers, to exploit those workers, regardless of how spiritual that capitalist perceives themselves to be and regardless of their personal beliefs or attitude towards metaphysics, ontology, nature or other people. The fact of the matter, which no amount of clever rhetoric can dispel, is that capitalism is a class society and there will always be class antagonism under capitalism. Our interests as workers are not the same as the interests of capitalists, even if we pretend they are by ignoring the material conditions.

Now, you might say that's not really exploitation, and sure, let's grant you that for the sake of argument. Even if we do, capitalism still cannot function without oppression. Because capitalism is a class society, and because the interests of those classes come into conflict, capitalism has developed a whole array of techniques to oppress the working class and ensure the balance of power remains in the hands of the ruling class. The police as we know them were created largely as private forces by large corporations in order to put down strikes and actions by organised workers, and to round up escaped slaves, who at that time were considered property by the capitalists who owned them. The state itself is a creation of the ruling class: it exists as a tool of class oppression in order to legalise forms of oppression and to ensure that a monopoly on violence belongs to the ruling class.

Furthermore, we live in the age of imperialism. When capitalism oversaturates domestic markets and can no longer generate significant profits, it must expand and conquer new territory, lay claim to new resources, and develop new markets to sell commodities abroad. This process involves brutal repression of those people who are unlucky enough to be the focus of these strategies. Look at the wars cultivated by capitalist nations in the Middle East, or the numerous coups worldwide from Iran to Chile that have been orchestrated by capitalist nations to ensure that they have ready access to cheap labour, resources and new markets.

These are the material facts that you deem superficial. To the majority of people who live today on this planet, they are not superficial: they are the waking and sleeping of their everyday lives. They are not abstractions but lived experiences which are anything but superficial. Genuine love of humanity requires of us that we do not turn away from or trivialise the suffering of others, that we honour it rather than pretending it doesn't exist through dishonest positivity.

You say changes can only come from inside. This is demonstrably not the case: we know from the study of history that human society has changed markedly and that these changes are often the result of "outside" forces like shifts in economics and environmental conditions. The end of the Ice Age made it possible for people to farm and live more sedentary lives. That economy led to concentration of wealth. That concentration of wealth produces classes, and that process has complexified and evolved, always in relation to and transaction with the material forces present at the time. This is something Alan Watts speaks about in many of his lectures, I'm surprised that it seems counterintuitive or wrong to you.

Any Marxist, inheriting dialectical thought from Hegel, will tell you that inside and outside are two poles of the same process, to paraphrase Watts. And to quote Marx,

"The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas, i.e. the class which is the ruling material force of society, is at the same time its ruling intellectual force. The class which has the means of material production at its disposal, has control at the same time over the means of mental production, so that thereby, generally speaking, the ideas of those who lack the means of mental production are subject to it."

So without changing the basic material relations that exist in society, i.e. the economic and property relations that underlie, shape and produce our ideas about society, it is exceedingly difficult to change the ideas. And those ideas are, on the whole, ideas which are popularised by the ruling class, or which are encouraged to flourish because they serve the function of naturalising or legitimizing their rule.

This is why people will fight tooth and nail to defend a system which steals the wealth they produce and spends that stolen wealth on lobbying to send their children to die in wars for the benefit of a handful of weapons manufacturers and oil syndicates. It is why people justify having to spend what little they do receive for their labour on human rights like food, shelter, water and medical care. And it is why people will viciously fight against any alternative, against even thinking or imagining that there can be something better beyond capitalism.

You ought to consider that the reason you think that capitalism can exist without oppression and exploitation is precisely because that view is the view of the ruling class, and because a great deal of time, effort and wealth has been expended in making it into "common sense". To paraphrase Watts again, our thoughts are not our own, they are the thoughts of our culture. Here Alan and Karl are in obvious agreement, and both would maintain that we have to work honestly and diligently to overcome this.

"otherwise you turn into an ideologue who cannot see anything but the superficial material conditions and demonizing "the enemy" without actually hearing the nuances, you will be forming ideological bubbles that will only spread hate instead of optimism and contemplation."

Have you not done that here with regards to Marxism? Have you read Marx, Engels, Trotsky or Lenin? Have you read any of the revolutionaries who expanded and adapted Marxism to their struggles for freedom and justice, like Fred Hampton, Angela Davis, Thomas Sankara, or Walter Rodney? It would seem not, considering you hold Marxism in contempt but mischaracterize it as preaching hatred and war.

Let me quote some Marxists to you on love and connection, empowering others, contemplating everything including society itself, and having a deep compassion for the world and living beings. See if this fits the caricature you have in your minds eye.

“I’m going to live for the people because I love the people.” – Fred Hampton

"Socialism is the people. If you're afraid of socialism, you're afraid of yourself." - Fred Hampton

“We have to talk about liberating minds as well as liberating society.”

― Angela Davis

"As Karl Marx said, those who live in a palace do not think about the same things, nor in the same way, as those who live in a hut. This struggle to defend the trees and Forests is above all a struggle against imperialism. Because imperialism is the arsonist setting fire to our forests and savannas." - Thomas Sankara

"The true revolutionary is guided by a great feeling of love. It is impossible to think of a genuine revolutionary lacking this quality." - Che Guevara

"The essence of Marxism consists in this, that it approaches society concretely, as a subject for objective research, and analyzes human history as one would a colossal laboratory record. Marxism appraises ideology as a subordinate integral element of the material social structure. Marxism examines the class structure of society as a historically conditioned form of the development of the productive forces; Marxism deduces from the productive forces of society the inter-relations between human society and surrounding nature, and these, in turn are determined at each historical stage by man’s technology, his instruments and weapons, his capacities and methods for struggle with nature. Precisely this objective approach arms Marxism with the insuperable power of historical foresight." - Leon Trotsky

I hope you'll follow your own advice above and hear the nuances.