A lot of people tell us that we are capitalists, or deny that we can be anti-capitalist, because we own our company. It is true that a primary definition of capitalism, and in some cases the only qualification, is that the means of production is privately owned. However, there is a presumption within that definition that everyone, fans and critics of capitalism alike, can agree upon, and that is the reason for ownership. If you were to ask anyone, fan or critic, why someone would want to take on the sheer responsibility and stress of owning a business, they would say it is for the money. The fans would say that owners boldly take on the risk of investment and proudly deserve to benefit through profit for this noble act. Critics would say that owners use their class privilege to create a system in which they benefit from the exploitation of the masses in a world where the most high paying job is to already have too much money. Depending on the specifics, both arguments have been true, but capitalism has never truly existed in any form without one of those arguments, until now. They define capitalism as ownership, without specifying ownership for the sake of profit, because it has never been necessary to define such an obvious and presumed thing... again, until now. We own because we need to have people in control that will protect our goal, and prevent any desire for profits from interfering with this experiment in economics. We own because we are accepting the burden, the risk, and the responsibility in an effort to prove a point, that we do not need to profit or to exploit human labor. We own because capitalists before us created a world where owning was the only way in which to have any power, including the power to elicit meaningful change.

Through that control of our tiny portion of the means of production, we are happy to create something without definition, that defies the expectation of the meanings of the very words used to describe this system. We are creating something new, not capitalist in nature, but able to function and even compete alongside it. We are breaking all the rules of expectations, and if we are still to be defined as capitalists then even the fans of that system must acknowledge that we are doing a piss poor job at it, completely ignoring the expected drive to seek profit and push our bottom line. By all accounts, definitions, and arguments.. we are terrible capitalists doomed for failure. Yet, we are succeeding, growing, thriving, expanding, and doing all of it to the sound of uproarious applause. If we are capitalists who are failing so terribly at capitalism... yet we are succeeding... then we are succeeding at something that is certainly not capitalism.