IMHO, this is a specious argument. We all like freedom.

When you choose to produce code you also are granted the right under existing copyright law to choose how it will be licensed. This is so say that you get to choose how it is used. Period.

The Copyleft license is only one flavor of licensing, and licensing has no bearing on you until you use other people's work in your project.

Once you cross that line, you are under the licensing restrictions of the work you are using.

If you don't like Copyleft, then don't use the software. That sounds to me to be the logical inverse of what you represent as Richard Stallman's argument. It sounds as though he has chosen which licenses he wishes to tolerate. You must do the same with anything coming out of the FSF. If you don't like the license, don't use the software.

Based on what you have represented, no one seems to be trying to change Copyright laws in order to abolish a proprietary model. Rather, a codebase with an alternative licensing model exists - arguably in isolation.

Can you explain how that actually impacts you directly?