"Still I am a Marxist," the exiled Tibetan Buddhist leader said in New York, where he arrived today with an entourage of robed monks and a heavy security detail to give a series of paid public lectures.
"(Marxism has) moral ethics, whereas capitalism is only how to make profits," the Dalai Lama, 74, said.
However, he credited China's embrace of market economics for breaking communism's grip over the world's most populous country and forcing the ruling Communist Party to "represent all sorts of classes".
"(Capitalism) brought a lot of positive to China. Millions of people's living standards improved," he said.
Marxism has "moral ethics" he says, but does not help people. Capitalism is what improves their standard of living. While I applaud the man for his civil rights stance and benevolence, I'm not 100% sure he is the best choice for a political leader. Part of the success of the Dalai Lamas comes not from their success as leaders of a country but for their success in encouraging those who are oppressed. Big difference, and no offense meant to any of them.

As for the definition of capitalism, I think you found a definition that suits you, but I have always believed it was closer to this:

Capitalism is an economic system in which the means of production are privately owned; supply, demand, price, distribution, and investments are determined mainly by private decisions in the free market, rather than through a planned economy; and profit is distributed to owners who invest in businesses. Capitalism also refers to the process of capital accumulation.

Ancient tribes and groups such as the Vikings were arguably capitalists.