While I agree the state is non-essential to the capitalist system, its absence would not make capitalism apolitical. The natural rights of life, liberty and property---the building blocks of politics---are implicit in voluntary relationships of any kind, including your would-be apolitical economic system.
Likewise, an ethics of rationality and self interest, an epistemology of reason and logic, and a metaphysics of a stable and knowable reality underlie economic freedom.
Unfortunately, this is a perfect example of libertarian shallowness. Try as you might, there will never be an economic escape for libertarians from the imperative of philosophy.
I don't recall ever saying that capitalism would or should be apolitical in the absence of a state. Politics can occur in private contexts as well as public. Competition between market actors can take the shape of politics.
Beyond that, I'm not sure what the point of your comment is.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
"In this view, capitalism is purely and simply: an economic system..."
That warned me. Then one paragraph later came this:
"...we do not view capitalism as a political-economic system, but just as an economic system."
Amidst this, you talk about owners and consent, both political ideas. It's a major contradiction.
As for your not understanding, the libertarian tendency to not understand things is just my point. I write primarily for myself as an exercise and for anyone else trying to understand, now or in the future.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
There’s a difference between a political system and a system that has political aspects. since you said you agree that capitalism can exist without a state, that would mean it isn’t a political system as commonly defined. So what definition of “political” are you operating under?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit