I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang
My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang
2. LOL socialists want to change who does the distribution without ever earning it. BTW, how is revolution NOT rule through violence?
Capitalism isnt plutocratic because whose at the top and the number at the top can change. Its not designed to be exclusive, its designed to be inclusive. The American revolution had people at the top making the rules that allowed for consent of the governed and a framework of laws beyond majority rule. The "rulers" change all the time, because that was the way it was set up. Socialists like yourself always talk about democracy until the mob disagrees with them. Socialism is not about democracy its about consolidation of power.
2. revolution just means change, no socialists want the distribution to be those who actually earn it, through labor, not through property ownership.
Capitalism is plutocratic by definition, thats like saying monarchies arn't monarchies because the king can change, also it is exclusive and growingly so, the rulers of capital are consolidating more and more, the American revolution was about political democracy.
As for your last point that isn't an argument its just a talking point, Socialism has always been about democracy.