>Rational actors didn't appear at the date when the model description of capitalism was defined. People kept slaves because they could (obviously). We can argue that they either did this for profit or for shits and giggles. I know what I'd bet.

We're literally discussing the causative relationship between a specific economic system, with specific foundations and philosophies, and moral and social progression, not the existence of amalgamous profit motive and how it was exercised in various social, political, and economic systems. Your point is entirely irrelevant to the discussion at hand. Profit motive is not capitalism. Mercantilism is not capitalism. Trade is not capitalism. Feudalism is not capitalism. I know anti capitalists like to label anything that has profit anywhere in it as capitalism but that's intellectually dishonest and completely outside accepted economic history and philosophy. Slavery isn't practiced in societies where it is morally and ethically opposed. If profit was the prerequisite for slavery, and not dehumanization, then it would persist regardless of morality. Profit seeking via slavery is entirely contingent on dehumanization. Capitalist societies are the only ones in human history that have enduring humanization of everyone, and that's not a coincidence.

>George Fitzhugh quote

You seem very adamant about raising points that have nothing to do with the assertions I've made. However, since we're copying and pasting out of context quotes from Wikipedia instead of actually reading or even attempting to read Sociology for the South, Cannibals All!, speech transcripts, or anything contextually, here's some quotes, including from the same subsection you copied and pasted from, that illustrate his sometimes paradoxical views on socialism, and my primary point, that his stance was based on anything that humanized black people, and argumentation shared by many in this thread against capitalism:

"We entirely agree with the socialists, that free competition is the bane of modern society. We also agree with them, that it is right and necessary to establish in some modified degree, a community of property. We agree with them in the end they propose to attain, and only differ as to the means.[...] What madness and folly, at this late day, to form society for human beings regardless of human nature. Yet the Socialists are guilty of this folly, and gravely propose to change man's nature to fit him for their new institutions. How much more wise, prudent and philosophical it would be to recur to some old tried forms of society, especially as we shall presently show that such forms of society have existed, and do now exist, as will remove all the evils they complain of, and attain all the ends they propose."

"No association, no efficient combination of labor can be effected till men give up their liberty of action and subject themselves to a common despotic head or ruler. This is slavery, and towards this socialism is moving."

"The Abolitionists and Socialists, who, alone have explored the recesses of social science, well understand that they can never establish their Utopia until private property is abolished or equalized. The man without property is theoretically, and, too often, practically, without a single right."

"Liberty is an evil which government is intended to correct. This is the sole object of government.“

"The great object of government is to restrict, control and punish man ‘in the pursuit of happiness'."

"Socialism, with such despotic head, approaches very near to Southern slavery, and gets along very well so long as the despot lives."

"Free trade or political economy is the science of free society, and socialism is the science of slavery."

"Property is not a natural and divine, but conventional right; it is the mere creature of society and law… if private property generally were so used to injure, instead of promote public good, then society might and ought to destroy the whole institution."

"Slavery is a form of communism… The manner to which the change shall be made from the present form of society to that system of communism which we propose is very simple."

"The bestowing upon men equality of rights, is but giving license to the strong to oppress the weak. It begets the grossest inequalities of condition."

"Slavery relieves our slaves of these cares altogether, and slavery is a form, and the very best form, of socialism."

"Private property destroys liberty and equality."

"The failure of laissez-faire, of political economy, is admitted now by its last and lingering votary. Free society stands condemned by the unanimous testimony of all its enlightened members."

"Our only quarrel with Socialism is, that it will not honestly admit that it owes its recent revival to the failure of universal liberty, and is seeking to bring about slavery again in some form."

"None but lawyers and historians are aware how much of truth, justice and good sense, there is in the notions of the Communists, as to the community of property. Laying no stress on the too abstract proposition that Providence gave the world not to one man, or set of men, but to all mankind, it is a fact that all governments, in civilized countries, recognize the obligation to support the poor, and thus, in some degree, make all property a common possession."

Hopefully this is sufficient to illustrate that your copying and pasting of Wikipedia, whose editors have done a great job of curating his article to support their overwhelming political leanings, was very foolish and short-sighted. Read the books before you attempt to use them authoritatively.

>You're not contradicting me. We can only have rights and freedoms by collectively agreeing where those limits are, and enforcing them as a society. That's what laws and regulations do.

No, those freedoms and rights exist regardless of whether or not a society does. It's only the imposition of society or others that attempts to take those things away. You don't magically get rights because of society.