Theft (vol 2)

This is in response to an old post of mine http://originalrudeboi.blogspot.com/2005/04/theft.html

Anyway - In that post I argue that theft is only real when there is a actual perceived loss. I still hold to this.

But when prepping a Lecture on W.K. Clifford's, "Ethics of Belief" I found the way to articulate another facet to the question of internet piracy.

Clifford states that, "What hurts society is not that it should lose its property, but that it should become a den of thieves; for then it must cease to be society."

Whoa! Clifford, it MUST stop being communal existence and living? WTF? I'm not sure that all the folks who find private property a crutch to civilization would agree.....but that isn't exactly my point right now.

So on one hand, I agree. Internet piracy, whether it be theft (perceived loss) or "harmless" is probably bad if it encourages a "den of thieves." My question (and it's simply that, a question) is if internet piracy of music is indeed encouraging a "den of thieves" in society.
First, this idea of a den of thieves must be understood, and I want to talk about it as the lessening of an understanding of private, public and corporate property. People are stealing from corporation, as employees ganking stamps or as customers shoplifting, people "taste-testing" in grocery stores, students have little concept of the teacher owning the pencil they "borrow" or petty theft of things like Internet access - digital media - cable is growing exponentially. I would advocate that the loosening of the public conception of what is "bad stealing" and what is "sticking it to the man - etc..."is indeed sufficient for society to be turning into a "den of thieves."
Second, the greater question must be which comes first, the theft or the thief. There is no theft until there is a thief right? But there are not thieves without there being theft. They seem to spring into existene (ursprung) in the same moment. So if this it the case - what are the necessary and sufficient causes to bring this about? Here is where I find less of an issue with the piracy than others might.

Piracy is bad - as is being a Pirate. (Arrrr, me hearties!)

But how is this behavior and ontological identity developed originally? Initially? As a person who puts an extreme primacy on the "nature" side of the debate - I want to argue that our children's lack of understanding that the pencil should be returned, and the internet pirate who sticks it to the man, are a subordinate problem stemming from (among other things) a greater notion of theft that is endemic of the United States.

A child's first example in behavior is their peer group and family group. The peer and family group's prime example of behavior is what is portrayed in the media. The media is dictated by the money behind the media. The money of the country is allowed it's form by a government.

This is slippery slope would be a bad place to find the grounds to advocate for an endemic problem of theft - wouldn't it?