The article raises some valid critiques about how Boeing's corporate failures, regulatory capture, and cozy relationship with government distort the picture of a truly "free market" capitalist system. However, it uses some flawed reasoning and overgeneralization to make its points. While highlighting real issues like the 737 Max disasters, lobbying influence, and lack of accountability, the author employs loaded language like "greedy executives" that undermine the objectivity. The claim that this is inherent to capitalism throughout history is a sweeping generalization based on limited examples. Overall, the article makes some legitimate critiques about the Boeing case study and corporatism, but also relies on fallacious arguments and rhetoric that weaken its logical cogency.

1. appeal to authority • The author cites the fact that Boeing was the subject of two Senate hearings as evidence of the company's wrongdoing:

Boeing achieved a rare feat in Washington on Wednesday, as the company was the subject of not one, but two hearings in the Senate.

However, this is an appeal to authority, as the Senate hearings do not necessarily prove that Boeing is guilty of any wrongdoing.

2. sweeping generalization • The author makes a sweeping claim that corporate influence over government, regulatory capture, and lack of real free market competition is inherent to capitalism across all times and places:

This system is not, as libertarians might argue, a perversion of 'true' capitalism. Nor is this some shadowy conspiracy. It is how capitalism has always worked -- all the way back to the British East India Company.

This is a sweeping claim that corporate influence over government, regulatory capture, and lack of real free market competition is inherent to capitalism across all times and places. However, this generalization fails to account for the many variations of capitalist systems that have existed.

There are instances where capitalist economies operated with stronger anti-trust enforcement, more robust regulations, and less intermingling of corporate/government interests. The generalization overlooks economies like Germany's social market economy model that blends capitalist free markets with strong social policies. It ignores periods like the post-WW2 era in the U.S. with heavier regulations before deregulation took hold.

So while the Boeing case study highlights some of capitalism's pitfalls, to say this level of corporate power and circumvention of free markets is definitionally how capitalism has "always worked" is an overreach. It fails to allow for the diversity of capitalist implementations and varieties of the system that have existed. The generalization is too sweeping to accurately describe all instances of capitalism throughout history.

3. loaded language • There are several examples of loaded language used by the author in

the text:

1. "infamous for its cost-cutting and corner-cutting culture" - When describing McDonnell Douglas, using the word "infamous" has a negative connotation.
2. "denigrating engineering expertise" - The word "denigrating" has a derogatory tone when describing Boeing's treatment of engineers.
3. "toxic fusion between public and private power" - Describing the relationship between government and corporations as "toxic" is loaded language.
4. "unaccountable bureaucrats" - Referring to bureaucrats as "unaccountable" carries a negative implication.
5. "subverting free market competition" - The word "subverting" has a subversive, undermining connotation when discussing corporations' actions.

So the author frequently uses loaded words like "greedy," "ruthlessly," "infamous," "denigrating," "toxic," "unaccountable," and "subverting" to criticize Boeing, regulators, and the capitalist system.