at least in the words of Nietzche.....and also many moderns who live in the political lane. You don't have to be Will Durant to figure out that there are only two fundamental ways to "do civilization". Either acknowledge, refine, and institutionalize the hierarchical nature of our species (capitalism), or em-brass the conjecture that human's, possessing reasoning/imagination attributes, can defy the hierarchical imperative and manage the human dynamic to "balanced happiness" (socialism).
Of course these two baseline sensibilities actualize in various hybrid forms, each evolving over time.
Unfortunately a historically attribute of both civilizing strategies is that they often evolve/devolve into the pre-civilized default pattern "fascism". As such it is obvious that we must continue the quest for a more perfect union. Surely we can keep tinkering with the various platforms looking for optimum. Trotsky's worlds-cape is not ours and neither is Vanderbilts. Bernie is not hoping for a Swiss Account and a palace in the Hamptons....he is more evolved.... further, Congressional Republicans do not wake up oblivious to global warming and infant mortality....they are more evolved. "If all we ever do is all we've ever done, then all we'll ever get is all we've ever had".
(Probably most who dabble in armchair philosophizing know that there is a forever controversy within Darwinian Evolution regarding whether evolution is excusively a property of discreet entities or whether it is a more universal attribute governing all change. Best guess is that all complex systems are evolving including civilizing socio-economic patterns).
While all civilizations oppose fascism, deciding between Capitalistic and Socialistic aligned strategies is problematic. Of course, everyone wants the species to survive and prosper, but, should we optimize the landscape for the higher endowed individuals hoping that the masses will live ever more prosperous in their draft, or alternatively, should we mandate and crowd source global equality solutions, allowing everyone a fair stake in whatever "ca sera" brings?
My personal sense is that I would go with Capitalism and thereby it's political mask, Democracy. Not because I believe in the profundity of Democracy. As a cultural strategy Democracy went sour a long time ago. That it still reigns in name is a testimony to the hollowness of the electorate who most certainly should not be trusted with our general welfare visa vi Socialism. By default, I put my money on the present wielders of real power, those effecting change in the shadows of the Democratic/Capitalist State. the corporate elite. These praxis people are much more evolved than their historical predecessors and are, most importantly, now constrained by a laundry list of existential global risks. Yes, their predecessors brought us most of these risks, but if they can be neutralized it will likely come from these same poiesis sources, not working in concert with the incredibly shallow and ineffectual Deep State, but in spite of it.
Niertzche was right. If we seek to prosper, indeed survive, lets face it, the State is stone cold. If we further empower the Trumps, the Schiffs, the Barrs, the Pings and the Putins, we will surley meet "stone cold". I know it sounds bizarre, but lets keep the Lobbyist welcome, the State weak, the Corporations powerful and pray that the Bills Elons, Tims, Jeffs, Peters, et. al can harness our global runaway so that there children will have a decent place to play at the pinnacle of a functional planet....and thereby save us.... "the tired, the poor, the huddling masses yearning to live for free, we the wretched refuse of yesterdays teeming shores, now homeless and tempest tossed, we lift our phones and cry help, here beside the once golden door."