How does a system deal with simple minded morons?

Basic diamat shows that communism can't possibly fail once fully implemented
Capitalism is a struggle between the workers and the owners, and struggles are eventually won by one side. Seeing as the owners need the workers but not the other way around, the workers will eventually win thus bringing communism, where no classes struggle against each other due to the lack of other classes existing, therefore making communism immortal in an ideological sense
Everyone I've met has been happy to share their shit with me so I honestly don't get this argument, the only greedy people are the upper classes from what I've experienced
that's what the barrel of the gun is used for :^)

That pictures. To my knowledge airlines are neither democratic governments, nor a body the average passenger is a citizen of.

Also, taking in to account the implied message that our elected leaders should be a properly trained individuals for the job, what counts as properly training for the job? Being a lawyer? A general? A CIA Director? An oil executive?

No shit, why do you think it was published in a mainstream magazine?
This shit doesn't hold up to 5 seconds of scrutiny.

This and the fact that the pilot and the passenger's interests are pretty much the same

Now without the ideological begging of the question, because that hasn't answered in 150 years.

please be consistent

I'm not OP, I find his question dumb and the responses given to him dumb as well. What does it mean for a "system" to fail, what does it mean for a system to succeed? These questions cannot be answered from a meta-ideology position of pure judgement.

whatever complements my ideology m8

A system fails when it stops being used
e.g. feudalism is a failed system, there's no denying it since no one uses it anymore
A Marxist would argue that capitalism will fail because class conflict will eventually lead to one class destroying the other
Asking someone to argue a hypothetical point such as "prove capitalism will fall" and then criticizing them for using hypothetical dialectics is bretty ebic too tbh