Aaron's argument cites the social programs introduced by Franklin Roosevelt during the great depression, which apparently benefitted only the lower classes. In fact, the New Deal can be more accurately characterized as a concession to the proletariat designed to stave off revolution. He appears to aver that this lack of revolution advantages both classes, which is odd. Chun uses the American antitrust laws to leverage his position on government. Although pure laissez-faire economics would permit the formation of monopolies, these actually threaten the capitalist system as a whole.
Monopolies eliminate competition, the defining feature of capitalism.
Thus the antitrust laws are imperative to its preservation. All four essays submit that capitalism has no foreseeable end. If they are, it remains to be answered whether or not capitalism can adjust to the newly formed productive forces. It may not be able to. Furthermore, read a certain way, the essays merely assert that capitalism works now, so it will continue to in the future.