I can clearly see that, and I hope you don't take this as a negligence of your position

I have no training in philosophy or political science, so I dont expect to take home any wins for the debate team. I just participate in order to learn a thing or two, and perhaps stimulate some more discussions on this sub. So I dont really take it to heart when my arguments doesnt hold :P

Idealistically I feel like a marxist..

All i meant by this is that I sympathise with the "idea" of flatter economy, and disolving economic class-systems. And I dont think this is truly achievable trough reformation. As you would have to reform within the current system (capitalism). However, I consider this more of a "romantic ideal" rather than something actually achievable, hence I`m not marching against the state armed with pitchforks and torches.

We have a desire for industry and generativity.

I dont believe this statement is historically contingent, its more of a commentary on the human experience. The strenght of capitalism is its facilitation for acting out libidinal drives in "safe" ways.

keeping in mind the classic: Drive - anxiety - defense mechanism.. Ill try to make some stupid examples :P

Mr.Capitalist has sexual drives he cannot express, leading to anxiety (the ego gets overwhelmed, by the unconscious fear of castration and / or loss of the mother). Now the defence mechanisms will limit drive-satisfaction, but will let mr.capitalist get indirect satisfaction typically by the process of distortion, sublimation or symbolic enactment. There are especially two "higher order" defence mechanisms that would be less available in a planned economy, namley displacement and sublimation. So in a society where everyone is "equal" in the economic sense. I would say that the availability of less threatening targets is more limited. Mr.Capitalist would always have too displace onto targets that was either his peer or the state. Which is not safe indirect drive satisfaction.

Sublimation into work forexample will not be rewarded the same way in a flat/planned economy as it does in capitalism. Forexample, lets imagine Mr.Capitalist is an asian worker from one of those contries with few women. So he doesnt have a family to take care of, yet he works 16 hours a day. Its plausible to think that this is an act of indirect drive satisfaction, allowing him to feel (industrious, generativ / creative) by creating capital (a replacement from lets say child rearing) which is valued and admired by society (instead of beeing valued admired by child). Wouldnt such behaviour be frowned upon in a society that is designed to achieve total equality?

Still, how does this question or counter the hegemonic?

I`m afraid I dont quite understand the question. Could you clarify what you are asking? Do you mean how my argument opposes the political/economic status quo? If this is what you are asking I am afraid my argument doesnt counter it, I just tried to illustrate that there are certain benefits too capitalism if you seek to satisfy sexual and aggressive drives. Simply put given how humans deal with anxiety its very understandable that capitalism has become the way we organize society.

My personal annoyance with capitalism is that it currently "demands" cost-effective sub-optimal mental health treatment, that doesnt represent how humans work or how treatment works.. Which is shamefull, especially in more socialistic contries that probably can afford more optimal treatment.