Copyrights Exist To Protect Creators And Owners In The First Place.

“Copyrights exist to protect creators and owners in the first place.” 

can we get a petition to change ‘creators and owners’ to ‘profit owners’?

i think that would be an more accurate label to reduce missunderstandings about copyright

Those who do evil justify themselves by saying that it is natural and that being closer to natural more optimal than any other The most natural thing is hydrogen floating in space, don't act as civilization is a natural phenomenon and the natural is the optimal, that civilization have not been created and maintained

“and there are people in my classes who are my age and are landlords for million dollar condos that their super rich parents bought them… and then talking about how we deserve more red tape and more harsh consequences for fucking up”

you mean the reason the high privlige class thinks we need more competition is that they feel how easy it is and therefor think we need harsher consequences?

Sounds bad, but didn’t Eurocentric modernism also give us our great democratic ideals of equality and liberty to elevate and protect us?  

Maybe these notions are not really our salvation, suggests Kanth. He notes that when we replace the vital ties of kinship and community with abstract contractual relations, or when we find that the only sanctioned paths in life are that of consumer or producer, we become alienated and depressed in spirit. Abstract rights like liberty and equality turn out to be rather cold comfort. These ideas, however lofty, may not get at the most basic human wants and needs. 

-kanth

The Eurocentric modernist program, according to Kanth, has four planks:

a blind faith in science; a self-serving belief in progress; rampant materialism; and a penchant for using state violence to achieve its ends.

In a nutshell, it’s a habit of placing individual self-interest above the welfare of community and society.

-kanth

I hate the nobel prize for legitimizing the religion of economics, trying to tell it as a science, 'laws of economics' like it is something physical, If money is only debt obligations, the only question is, who owes what to whom? And we get to decide that, not some 'law'