If the status quo when Amazon started was a high minimum wage with strong unions and employee (or at least local) ownership, this might be a more compelling argument. As it is, the capitalists in Bentonville are losing out to the capitalists in Seattle because the former rely on massively state-subsidized labor while the latter just axes the labor all-together.
I'm not saying it isn't a problem, but this isn't something that was created by (or even made worse by) Amazon. This is an important point because without a proper diagnosis, we'll never find the cure.
Also, Amazon beating Walmart is an exemplar of free markets at work -- one competitor besting another on merit alone (actually, even DESPITE massive federal and state tax incentives propping up the losing side!) Maybe the conclusion you should be drawing from your dislike of the status quo is that free markets aren't a panacea after all?
Finally, I'll note that Amazon distribution facilities -- for all the valid criticisms -- at least pay a (barely) living wage in many areas. Walmart pays substantially less.