Growth as an end

Edit: I was proven correct

"I'd like to share a revelation I've had during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species. I realized that you're not actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with their surrounding environment, but you humans do not. You move to another area, and you multiply, and you multiply, until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet. You are a plague, and we are the cure." -Agent Smith

I mean, yes, we're seeing a general rapacity balloon out of control, but hey, electric vehicles will make everything better.

And we have the pleasure of enjoying the last stage of it.

The solution for cancer is usually killing the cancer or removing the cancer. I wonder what the capitalism equivalent is…

If we just let a self selected group of people have total control of our economy, things will turn out better this time. They promise.

"The previous attempts failed because they didn't do it right. We will get it right, this time."

I take it more as humans acting out of individualist self-interest (which capitalism incentivizes above all else) as being more likened to cancer. All it can take is one mutated-individualist-greedy cell to ignore the signals from the surrounding tissues to cause cancer.

The Earth isn't a closed system. The Universe might be but I feel pretty confident we'll have moved on from any currently recognizable economic system by the time we fill that up.

Capitalism does not require infinite growth, this idea is not taken seriously in economic circles. Keynesian and neoclassical economics do not consider or require infinite growth.

You can be profit driven and not require infinite growth, if you make 2% profit every year you are not requiring infinite growth.

It's not true that maximizing profits is the duty of a company to it's shareholders, here it is from NYT and supreme court:

There is a common belief that corporate directors have a legal duty to maximize corporate profits and “shareholder value” — even if this means skirting ethical rules, damaging the environment or harming employees. But this belief is utterly false. To quote the U.S. Supreme Court opinion in the recent Hobby Lobby case: “Modern corporate law does not require for-profit corporations to pursue profit at the expense of everything else, and many do not.”