Which state are you referring to?

If you think copyright shouldn't exist, you're free to ignore any rights afforded you for your work, "the state" is not going to enforce anything unless you bring a case to a court.

I understand the MIT licence as convention, and it makes sense. It's just you're opining on a public forum about copyright being somehow antithetical to "basic principles on which our governance is founded" whilst attaching copyright notices to your work.

Much of common law is specifically about property, upon which a good portion of modern day governance is founded. So your objection to copyright seems somewhat misinformed.

What is it about copyright that you think is a negative in today's society?

Because it sets an example:

Pay the appropriate fee to the creators for their hard work, and ask permission before taking something that isn’t yours.

They didn’t even attempt to deal in good faith.

Yes, unequal enforcement of the law is inherently unjust and ripe for abuse. That doesn't mean the law shouldn't be changed, but a legal system that arbitrarily picks and chooses when it enforces the law is corrupt and has a built in method to persecute and target select people and groups. It undermines the very principle of Rule of Law and allows unjust laws to remain on the books ready to be selectively enforced.