Academics that see a problem with animal use often oppose capitalism.
Their opposition ranges from disapproval to outright hostility.
However, harmful results have occurred all over the world, regardless of political system, with some of the worst results in systems that disavowed capitalism.
Communism, for example, was responsible for over 90 million deaths last century.
Morality precedes politics. Political systems are built on a moral base, but if that moral base in wrong, that flows through to the political system.
Animals have been used across a range of political systems from past to present. As such, animal use is no more a problem of capitalism than it is of any other political system that accepts it.
However capitalism has key advantages over other political systems that either rely on coercion to varying degrees—from democracies to dictatorships—or don’t always directly address the hostile use of force (anarchism).
In The Objectivist Ethics, Ayn Rand explains that, “The principle of trade is the only rational ethical principle for all human relationships, personal and social, private and public, spiritual and material. It is the principle of justice.”
As capitalism is based on the principle of trade, that is, voluntary exchange, it’s also based on the principle of justice.
Whether that principle is realised properly or not is another matter. But just as the existence of criminals in a society don’t mean the principles underlying it are unjust, so too, the use of animals and other transgressions aren’t an indication of capitalism’s failure.
They are a serious flaw in the morality underlying how capitalism is practiced, not a flaw in capitalism. Capitalism, as outlined by Ayn Rand, is a philosophy of freedom.
Capitalism has brought incredible global transformations: in poverty, hunger, wealth, standard of living, technology and so on.
The challenge is to fully realise it—not to abolish it in mid stream for a specious or destructive alternative.