The affirmative is faux radicalism. It still relies on property, ownership, and commodification. Those discursive endorsements facilitate the colonial imposition of neoliberalism globally

Foucault’s use of the term “discourse” would not be out of place to use in our discussion of intellectual property and as a strategy to understand the ‘propertisation,’ commodification, ownership and protection of ideas.254 Similar to the discourse of colonialism, intellectual property as a ‘discourse’ is used to construct, justify and legitimate further expansion of intellectual property’s commodity form and its application. The discourse of colonialism can be a useful comparator in trying to understand and discuss the ever-expansive growth of intellectual property. In general, the discourse of colonisation helps to frame, conceptualise and understand the propertising and commodifying discourses of “progress” and “innovation” inherent in intellectual property claims. As an analogy and to paraphrase Saïd: “Without examining… [intellectual property] as a discourse one cannot possibly understand the enormously systematic discipline by which European culture was able to manage – and even produce – [intellectual property]” 255 and the power required to construct intellectual property as a commodity and system and impose it on the world.