You have a problem: people doesn't want to use the content in a way that's easy to monetize. You don't like the solution of changing your business model.

So the answer is draconian IP laws, privacy invasions and public resources devoted to ensure private profits. Resources paid by every tax payer, that can be used to prosecute most of them.

The entitlement is forgetting that copyright (or property at large for the matter) is just a means to an end, not an absolute concept.

For me, if the price of privacy and freedom is that professional contents producing disappears, so be it. Now what? Would you consider changing the business model or would you rather see the business dying? For the people in the industry (the proverbial "middle-man") the answer is clear: they don't think it's gonna die before they cash, so they're happy taking the hard line and stretching the rope.

This is true, but I'm not sure it then follows that because you want to enjoy some work, you are entitled to not pay for it. The creator is entitled to charge for it and receive nothing and you are entitled to pay nothing and enjoy nothing.

You've constructed a straw man, I haven't once argued for draconian IP law. I simply stated that those that engage in piracy should be honest to themselves about their own motivations. I'm not even judging them, it's just the political affectations I find preposterous.

Most laws have developed from a consensus of what benefits society as a whole. This is no different. Nobody is claiming entitlement to be paid for anything. They're asking for the ability to choose on which basis people consume their product. We already have laws for this, the currently difficulty is in how to enforce them. I don't claim to have an answer to that question.

No You didn't. You said, among other things:

The whole piracy political movement is manifestly obviously just rationalisation

These are two very different statements. A pirate can be both honest with himself and part of the political movement for reasons other than rationalization. You were the one who established the strawman.

You're choosing to ignore that the draconian laws are actually in place and for the stated reason to prevent piracy.

They're asking for the ability to choose on which basis people consume their product.

They can't on their own, so they demand the government to apply an unreasonable amount of force. There's no consensus for the actual situation, just political inertia and propaganda.