Why doesn't capitalism allow stealing?

Lately, it has been fashionable for those with the the most money or power in our society to parrot the phrases "capitalism" and "free market society" - and to try to convince the layman that these are synonymous with a kind of "survival of the fittest" society. Putting aside for a moment the obvious gibe that it's easy for those on top to argue for survival of the fittest - I was struck the other day by a question my friend asked.

It was simply:
"Why then, doesn't capitalism allow theft?"

This has sat in the back of my brain for a few days, churning away, and I think I'm finally ready to give a response. I'll warn the reader ahead of time that this response is going to be completely amoral.

I'd wanted to answer my friend's question with an immediate, terse response - but after thinking for a moment I had to stop and ask a few questions of my own.

What is capitalism?

Capitalism is actually a layered idea; in order to really understand it, I figured I'd have to start from the bottom layer and move to the top one.

The first layer of what we actually refer to as capitalism is the contract society (yes, I'm going to be referring frequently to our friend Mr. Locke). The basic premise of this is that people have agreed to live in a society where contracts will be enforced. This is one of the most important parts of a capitalist society.

The second layer (and most likely the most familiar) is the society we have formed around our central contract - in the case of the United States it would be the Constitution. Capitalism - regardless of document - is allowed based on certain points:

1. The individual has the intrinsic rights of life, liberty, and property.
2. Liberty is defined as the right of an individual to do anything, provided it does not also affect the liberty or the property of another individual. Liberty is not described in terms of what is allowed; Liberty is all things which are not expressly forbidden.

The short answer to the original question is now "because it's illegal". The slightly longer one is "because it violates the basic right of property, theft can't be allowed in a functioning capitalist society".

Survival of the Fittest

One of the most interesting things about the claim that capitalism is the same as "survival of the fittest" is that it's wrong. The most interesting thing is the reason why it's wrong.

Darwin's ideal of survival of the fittest is usually interpreted to mean "there are no rules, only success or failure". This is directly at odds with capitalism, which - as was stated above - says "anything goes, provided it doesn't violate the contract (if you violate that contract, you will be compelled to obey it)". As we saw, a capitalist society can not function when the underlying contract is not obeyed. Regardless of whether compliance is voluntary or forced, all parties must abide in order for the system to function.

Sadly, this does mean certain business practices are legal within our current contract (shipping labor overseas is a good example).

However, this also means that certain things that are currently being done are worse than they may look at first appearance. Take, for example, the corporation that disobeys an environmental law. For whatever reason, the attorney general does not attempt to prosecute or otherwise punish this corporation. This is worse than a violation of a simple law and a case of political disinterest. Failure to prosecute corporations which violate laws fundamentally undermines the contract society itself. It violates the expectation that the contract will be enforced.