Asklemmy

That intellectual property, both copyright or patents, doesn't serve its theoretical purpose and just acts as a legal shield for the monopolies of big corporations, at least in our capitalistic system, and it limits the spread of information

In theory, a musician should be protected against abuse of their music. In practice, all musicians need to be on Spotify through one of the few main publishers to make any decent money, and their music will be used for unintended purposes (intended for their contract at least) like AI training

In theory, patents should allow a small company with an idea to sell its progressive product to many big corporations. In practice, one big corporation will either buy the small company or copy the product and have the money to legally support its case against all evidence, lobbying to change laws too. Not to mention that big corporations are the ones that can do enough research to have relevant patents, it's much harder for universities and SMEs, not to mention big corporations can lobby to reduce public funding to R&D programs in universities and for SMEs.

And, last but not least important, access to content, think of politically relevant movies or book, depends on your income. If you are from a poorer country, chances are you cannot enjoy as much information and content as one born in a richer country.

I don't like extreme leftists (they live in a bubble) but they've been right about everything and they are our best chance at resolving economic disparity

• permanent revolution;
• that parties should be democratic institutions;
• that burocratization leads to deformed proletarian states.

I think if we eliminated money, we would just invent it again and call it something else.

People should be free to vote outside the two party system secure in the knowledge that their vote will still be counted if their preference didn't win.

• Religion can be a force for good. For social cohesion and a feeling of belonging. That it often isn't speaks more to the samesuch cultural and emotional rot that has affected literally everything than to religion unto itself.

• It actually makes perfect sense for a country to want to limit or tariff importation of goods. This, if done right, can bring industrialisation into the country. You can't have a nation that is all middle-managers, despite the First World's best attempts to become that, it's just fundamentally unsustainable. And while you can have a nation that just produces/exports raw materials, this is ultimately bad for the people in that nation.

I'm really appreciating how much restraint y'all guys are showing with the downvotes. Thanks everyone.

It seems like the atmosphere is changing now but I've been saying this for years.

The language of privilege is backwards and counter productive.

I don't really know what constitutes a "political creed," really, so I don't know how to answer.

We should try harder to keep weapons out of the hands of criminals, sometimes taxation is necessary and sometimes it's beneficial even if we don't factor in revenue, people will sometimes make decisions that are so bad that we have a moral obligation to intervene in order to protect them from the most disastrous outcomes