On the surface. But, you’re being rhetorical, in the original sense of the word. You can link words together but fail to do logic. You’re doing duckspeak, quack quack

You’re just gatekeeping, not looking at what makes art that

You have no comprehension of relevance.

The early 20th century? I’d say physical philosophy would beg to differ, and do you see how you just killed your own argument by citing a time period? I think ideas don’t have value and that intellectual property stifles innovation. You had me in the first half, where I assumed you meant that people don’t just intuit new ideas from nowhere, then you cited a date and lost me.

Easy. Don’t work a job or pay rent. Anarchism already exists. It just exists in the crannies (like right in front of you) where other domineering primates don’t beat you with sticks or boss you around. You don’t fix the system. You ignore it.

As an artist, all y’all need to chill. The problem is capitalism, and it’s not like artists make a living anyway. Democratizing art opens up a lot of possibilities, you technophobes.

You really should catch up with the rest of us on leftist ideology. Also, realize that the scary picture in your head with no government is exactly the world we live in, today, while the government simply wages wars for corporations and keeps itself intact by commodifying human behavior.

Is this guy on drugs?

So, we don’t do government