Hence why post-scarcity is the natural death point of capitalism.

Your question is essentially the same as Freudians arguing among themselves about the existence of a death drive: How could it possibly benefit the individual? If it can't in some way benefit the individual, how can it be a drive? How does it mesh with the pleasure principle? The answer is simple: It doesn't benefit the individual. In certain circumstances it benefits the genome, that's why us seed-pods can, in certain circumstances, enter states in which it is pleasurable.

And all-encompassing and all-powerful, indeed, religious, as capitalism may seem right now it, too, is a seed pod. It does not have to will its abolishment to bring about the material conditions abolishing it.

Of course there's also nothing speaking against it not making things unduly nasty for us. But that's mere politics, not fate.

I suspect cats. https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/9756-toxoplasmosis

one of the many reasons to keep your cats indoors.

Fool. Allow me to show you truth: https://timecube.xyz/

Eris help us, the zoomers are here with lame humour.

Pretty sure this is exactly correct. I read the Kurzgesagt book Immune recently and it was a fascinating view into how our bodies are really the result of ancient warfare, with constant oneupmanship between us and the environment.

Survival of the fittest does not work with intent.