Capitalism is easily given undue credit for the obvious success of democratic countries - as if it existed only in these countries. At least in conversations among us laymen. Of course there are different flavors of capitalism, and different definitions, but let's not care about that. What I would like to do is to highlight another perspective.
Capitalism is a powerful force for a society, since it harnesses the greed of man in a race for progress. However, it has lots of downsides, which are obvious in all kinds of societies. There are societies that have tried to avoid the downsides by completely forbidding capitalism. What seems to happen is the opposite. They miss out on the benefits, while getting most of the problems.
Socialistic/Communist societies aren't failures per-se , but have failed in that they have tried to neglect the existence of a fundamental force, and thus haven't built the systems to take it into account. Since capitalism has continued to exist in these societies, they haven't had the mechanisms in place to contol it - and as a result it has gotten out of control.
Successful societies are the ones that have acknowledged the existence of capitalism
These societies have systems in place to limit the most extreme effects of capitalism - both bad and good. Capitalism is like fire. It isn't good or bad in itself, but depends on it being recognized and controlled to the benefit of society.
The bottom line is this: It is clearly beneficial for a society to acknowledge reality, and use reality as a basis for all systems. This might sound obvious, but just look at history - and even present day in unsuccessful societies. What if developing countries could acknowledge "the law of the people", and incorporate it into their frameworks? What if democracies never acknowledge that governments tend to grow without limits? How will it end?