If you are correct about it taking 8 hours of labor to provide for oneself, this number is still far more time expended for food production than in a capatalist economy
This is another misunderstanding of economy. In farm Communism, person produces food for himself. Not for 20 others. It takes only 2 hours a day to care for 50 chickens, and these alone produce much more food than an individual can eat. Same goes for few cows, few sheep, few goats, ducks, goose, turkey... They eat grass and they forage food, produce food, very simple economy. No any hard work. In fact, the 2 hours of work there are easier than any work in Capitalism, so less rest time from work needed there, which leaves even more free time. It is common sense that more work and more difficult work requires more time to be rest from work, and this has effect on free time. It doesnt matter much which single animal person chooses to farm, as quick trade with farm next door is possible to create some variety in food. As for plant farming and forage, same applies. Trees are very easy to grow, give plenty of food and are very healthy for environment. And they can be used in combination with animal farming to reduce amount of food needed from animals. Technology didnt have any significant improvements on animal farming or tree farming. The basics are still same. Animals go outside and eat grass. However, in Capitalism, much more work is needed, because each person must produce 20 times more food than he needs just to sustain the rest of the system. So one person must have 400 chickens instead of 50, and much more work follows then.
Under true capatalism, monopolys would be far more rare than they currently are
We are not debating any fantasy true Capitalism, so this point is completely irrelevant to topic. Capitalism was already defined in description as is.
Thus, 2 is conceded.
Point 3 about more healthy food being produced is correct
3 conceded.
point 4: incressing forests and grasslands
people in capitalist economies can choose to care for the environment
Sadly, the math doesnt even allow this. "Only farms" will always have much less effect on forests and grasslands than "farms plus factories". To put it simply, this Capitalism already resulted in deforestation and loss of grasslands.
To sum it up:
The wagey could never understand such Communism. Wagey has more wealth, but ironically not much free time to enjoy that wealth. Wealth is defined by use value, use value requires time, wagey actually doesnt have much wealth. By sacrificing free time, wagey loses both wealth time and family time, and gains nothing until he is too old for anything.
Wagey (person who works a lot for wage) has trouble getting enough sleep. Its really simple math. 10 hours of job and 8 hours of sleep leave only 6 hours of free time, which is then further reduced by necessary daily activities and rest from all work.
Being a wage slave is the dumbest choice one can possibly make. Its literally better to be homeless. Take it by mere numbers there. Average wagey only has 15% to 20% of his adult life as free time, unless he deducts from sleep which many do. And thats assuming he has no family of his own.
As Karl Marx has said, Capitalism does indeed exploit the worker.
In fact, the framework of Capitalism is:
More work time = more wealth, less free time
People praise Capitalism for getting some people out of poverty while failing to understand that Capitalism caused an entirely different kind of poverty. A poverty where people sacrifice their spiritual growth and freedom for material wealth.
In this sense, Capitalism is the prediction of greatest of ancient philosophers which came true: time when material wealth consumes the souls and minds of people.
The choice of reduction in free time (ability to do as you choose) is in itself a self contradictive choice.
The choice to replace grasslands and forests with factories, buildings and roads, and the choice to replace healthy food with processed food, just shows what Capitalism leads to.
bullshit