75% of the anti-piracy discussions I see rarely blame companies like Nintendo or Disney and always try to talk about how piracy is immoral, and you should feel “dirty” for doing it. My question is why do people seem to hate those who pirate more than the bad practices of mega-corporations or the fact that they don’t want to preserve their media?

  • antlion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    15 days ago

    It’s because they are paying money for something and you’re getting a better deal. See that’s not fair. Same reason vegans hate on omnivores - they’ve taken the high road and the benefits are small while the cost is high. They tell themselves that their money is going to the artists. And if you believe that, then piracy is harming artists in a very direct way.

    • Angel [any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      15 days ago

      Same reason vegans hate on omnivores - they’ve taken the high road and the benefits are small while the cost is high.

      This “vegans have a superiority complex” take is a thought-terminating cliché ultimately rooted in projection. Since vegans make you feel self-conscious about the unethicality of your carnist tendencies, you divert to accusations of a “superiority complex” when that is just the result of you internally grappling with the cognitive dissonance you have when it comes to funding animal exploitation that you have no proper justification for.

      Veganism is a justice movement, and vegans express disdain for non-vegans because they often double down on their oppressive tendencies that keep animals enslaved, exploited, and slaughtered. I don’t think I’m superior to you because, just like me, you have the capacity to understand why you shouldn’t support the oppression of sentient beings. Not only do you have the capacity to understand it, but you can take that to its logical conclusion and live in a way that is in accordance with said understanding.

      Also, the framing is off here. A principled ethical vegan doesn’t see veganism as a “benefit;” we see it as a moral obligation and baseline. Saying that veganism comes with “benefits” is like saying that refraining from calling racial minorities ethnic slurs comes with “benefits,” when it’s actually just basic decency toward BIPOC.

      • antlion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        15 days ago

        There’s no projection. I feel no guilt for eating the diet of every single one of my ancestors. Zero. I do not believe animals to be sentient, and I do not equate death or servitude with suffering. It’s not that I don’t understand vegans. I do. But it’s like a religion - you have a fundamental belief, not in god, but in the consciousness of animals. Because we differ on that fundamental belief, we can reach no understanding about the ethics beyond that.

        And I think it is a fair comparison. People who pay for media may also see it as an ethical baseline to pay for what you consume. And in both the case of vegans, and those who pay for streaming, the perceived benefit of that choice is in my opinion fundamentally flawed. But it’s really not a big deal to me. I was just trying to answer OPs question. I think your response only validates my analogy. Thank you.

        • Angel [any]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          15 days ago

          How so? I literally stated that they have the exact same capacity as me to understand why veganism is a moral obligation. Such an understanding isn’t hard to grasp, and I’m no ascended, especially enlightened person for being vegan. If I believed myself to be, I’d have no reason to hold others to the same standard. The incentive lies in the fact that carnism comes with victims; veganism isn’t about me.

          Regardless, this is an ad hominem and, as I stated, a thought-terminating cliché. It’s a loophole to avoid engaging with ideas via focusing on the people expressing such ideas instead. Do you have any actual insight regarding the assertions I’m making or is it just cope?

          • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            15 days ago

            they have the exact same capacity as me to understand why veganism is a moral obligation.

            This is a “begging the question” logical fallacy

            this is an ad hominem and, as I stated, a thought-terminating cliché.

            veganism is a moral obligation

            carnism comes with victims

            is it just cope?

            What thoughtful discussion arises from someone repeatedly telling you that they’re morally superior to you for choosing one specific diet over another? You’re projecting here.

            I have no issues with someone being vegan, but I take issue with self-righteous people such as yourself who can’t help but talk about how superior their choices are.

            • Angel [any]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              15 days ago

              This is a “begging the question” logical fallacy

              How is asserting “It doesn’t seem morally superior to hold others to the exact same moral standard as me” circular reasoning? Explain in detail; don’t just say it like it’s obvious and a “no shit” kind of take.

              What thoughtful discussion arises from someone repeatedly telling you that they’re morally superior to you for choosing one specific diet over another? You’re projecting here.

              You are disingenuously undermining what veganism is by phrasing it as a trivial dietary choice. And once again, this isn’t about whether vegans are “morally superior” or not. You can engage in ideas without using such an ad hominem as a cushion for your own guilt, but you are still actually refusing to do so. There is no reason why veganism, as a subject, should get an automatic quick dismissal via accusations of a “superiority complex” than any other subject. For instance, I take it and hope that you wouldn’t say “anti-racists think they’re so superior to racists 🙄,” but doing so holds the exact same amount of weight as what you’re doing right now with veganism. You’re using a thought-terminating cliché to degrade the person asserting an idea rather than discussing the idea itself.

              I have no issues with someone being vegan, but I take issue with self-righteous people such as yourself who can’t help but talk about how superior their choices are.

              There is a reason why I said “veganism isn’t about me.” You are committing victim erasure by glossing over the fact that I made very clear that veganism is a justice movement that takes a stand for victims. And once again, you are just repeating the same exact issue of ad hominem and a thought-terminating cliché by calling vegans “self-righteous” and disingenuously strawmanning them as people who just want to circlejerk about the “superiority of their choices” rather than engage in and advocate for a justice movement.