Yeah, this does seem like a kind of inaccurate generalization.
Does this mean you honestly wouldn't have a preference if you were dropped into a random "place" in one of these countries' societies and had to live the rest of your life there?
It's easy to say "Hey, plus a few ethnic cleansings, minus an intentional lack of economic development in favor of political corruption, plus a couple of highly extractive, insecure, and immoral sets of socio-economic conditions... and I mean we're all basically the same, amirite??"... But while each country's civil society is kinda fucked in some fundamental ways, they seem like unique ways that are hard to compare "apples to apples".
EDIT: Having said that, the issues in each country strongly depend on dividing lines between various "peoples", and a manufactured assurance that your conditions are the best that they could possibly be, so...
Capitalism and free markets are separate things within the economic "sphere" of society. Capitalism is an economic doctrine that focuses on directing production through private capital; free markets (in theory) ensure "equal access" to markets for products (as compared to monopoly or (economic, not necessarily drug) cartel markets which restrict access).
Over in the "public sphere", governments decide whether to jump in bed with private capital (often resulting in monopolies or cartels in economic marketplacs), or to make & enforce regulations that protect the (so-called) free market.
Or to make and enforce regulations that protect consumers -- i.e. human f-ing beings -- and enrich local economies without protectionism and "zero sum games", but I guess we shouldn't get too carried away here ;)