Its textbook definition and how it actually manifests itself in reality are never going to be the same thing.
The GP had an issue with a particular "breed of capitalism". Capitalism is an ideal just as much as socialism, and humans aren't great at living up to ideals. "Particular breeds" are all we are ever going to have - our best bet is likely to fix the "breed" rather than attempt to replace the system entirely. Social democracies that can harness the wealth-growing capabilities of capitalism tempered with a degree of socialism so everyone gets to enjoy the benefits seem to work pretty well in much of the developed world.
Capitalism rewards effective producers by routing capital for them to expand. When consumers conspire to force producer shutdowns, the problem is politics rather than capitalism.
Except that those consumers are doing so because they believe it's the best way to expand (or at least protect) their capital.
Such a position wouldn't make any sense in a non-capitalist economy, so at least part of the problem is how to actually ensure capitalism works effectively given human nature.