As with so many articles whose titles are questions, the answer is no. The author is wrong on several premises: 1. Capitalism is not the thing that saves us fr

As with so many articles whose titles are questions, the answer is no. The author is wrong on several premises: 1. Capitalism is not the thing that saves us from authoritarianism and fascism, nor was it before - in the context of WW2, for instance, I'd argue that authoritarianism and fascism's ruthless desire for continuous increases in power became self-defeating because of the enemies it made those regimes. 2. Capitalism does not represent a fight for liberty. It represents a bunch of individual actors fighting for their own resources, and therefore, implicitly, requires a certain amount of liberty, for those people only. 3. Capitalism does not actually care how many rights you have. It cares only about how much value you produce, no matter how you produce it. Capitalism only benefits those who already have enough resources to be "in" the fight. (The author notices this, but seems to think it's a good thing. It's not.) Capitalism already saved us, after World War 2, from economic stagnation and, ultimately (in the model of the Soviet Union), collapse. Now, it's time for the next thing to come along and save us from the problems of capitalism. It's difficult to say what exactly that thing is, but much as before, it probably doesn't involve capitalism totally dying or going away. It probably involves it being reined in, changed, and retrofitted, along with many other parts of our society.