The diagram centrists don't want you to see
Centrism frames the debate about capitalism as one of consent vs. coercion and argue that capitalism is fine because workers consent in the legal sense to the labor contract. Democratic theory recognizes a distinction among voluntary contracts i.e. consent to alienate vs. consent to delegate. A centrist can't appeal to this distinction because capitalism and political democracy are on opposite sides
The only thing "capitalistic" about a job contract is that you are able to abandon it at any time and get another one. Besides, the fact that capitalism only work between consenting adults doesn't mean it only happens this way. This is one of the largest reasons we got big governments on the 20th century, to make sure rich people don't break everything down.
Again, you'll only find people that disagree with that on those "economy cults" that insist on radicalizing people into nonsense.
Also, worker coops only woks for specific kinds of work, and employee-owned companies tend to not stay employee-owned on practice. It's really good that those 2 exist, but it's a delusion to think you can organize an economy this way. (I'd check for one of those "economy cults" around if you really believe on it.)
You called centrists framing the debate about capitalism as one of consent vs. coercion a strawman then accepted the framing. Democratic theory requires consent. It just also requires consent to delegate ruling out consent to alienate management/governenance rights justified by inalienable rights.
Stable employee-owned firms:
https://www.nceo.org/articles/employee-ownership-100
A country that lets people sell voting rights wouldn't be democratic for long. Does democracy not work? Is it undesirable?
@progressivepolitics