There's a presumption here that there's an objective "good" for society, likely as defined by this professor. One of the primary virtues of capitalism is that i

There's a presumption here that there's an objective "good" for society, likely as defined by this professor. One of the primary virtues of capitalism is that it makes no such presumption and empowers and frees disparate tribes to pursue their own "good" within the bounds of a constructive construct. Correspondingly, one of the vices(?) of socialism is the presumption of a single societal good. This of course makes sense when we have non-reproducible/limited resources like the environment or rights that could conflict like the use of force, but for all other resources like how we spend our lives, what we build, where we go, what we enjoy, freedom by definition means a subjective "good". I always find it curious when postmodernism (skepticism of societal mores) presumes any form of objective truth.