It's the difference between the freedom of a bill of rights and the freedom of anarchy. Both ways make sense, they just don't get along together.

That is only possible if you completely subvert the actual meaning of "open source". Feel free to argue that you think MIT/BSD gives more freedom to the downstream developer but please do not play around with words. GPL is open source, and ensures its derivatives stay open source. MIT/BSD do not do the latter, for better or worse.