1. All these references point the finger at monopolization of capital. Why is there not a single reference about monopolization of monopolization of labor force? In my initial (between you and me) message I emphasized the coexistence of both types of monopolization in the capitalist society.
2. So far, have you found any capitalist country that is dominated by a single capitalist? In other words, if this has ever happened, in the case of America, this single capitalist, by one person or one family, will dominate Boeing, Mcdonal, AT&T, Jack in the Box, Chevron, GM, Ford, GE, CitiBank, AiG, ... including, but not limited to, all three branches of the government. In comparison, in the socialist countries, which, ever since their debut, have never stopped for one second all hysterical screaming against monopolization found in capitalist country, must monopolized anything the leading core can reach in their country: Kim Jeong Ill in North Korea, Castro in Cuba, Nicolae Ceauşescu in Romania, Mao Tsetung in China (That he actually missed the opportunity is not because he didn't want it but because his heir could not survive the situation). A typical example is Hugo Chavez. He expressed extreme hatred toward America for the monopolization nature he detected about this country. Back home, however, he extended his monopolization action step by step: currently seeking 25 year term presidency.
3. In the later part of your message, you said "The role of the state is to maintain the conditions of its rule, not to attack monopolies. It will do so generally only insomuch as it prevents the collapse of the system." Have you seen any socialist county "do so generally only insomuch as it prevents the collapse of the system" by enacting any law against power monopolization? On the contrary, for example, the Chinese constitution stipulates that "Chinese Communist Party leads everything in China". Leading everything must mean monopolizing everything in political operation and no other explanation is allowed.
4. So, now, as a summary of the above questions, please answer me, while monopolization of capital is intolerable, why "leading everything", power and capital all together, in the absolute control of a "chosen" few must be so acceptable by the entire population?