[dead]
Ironically, I am a statist too. I believe a state has a rightful place in society, in managing the commons, and expending its revenue on public goods. What I don't believe a state has a right to do is violate human rights, in imprisoning people for engaging in some voluntary action or interaction by and between consenting adults, or for refusing to hand over a share of the currency they receive in private trade.
But you didn't consent to the contract. Choosing to stay in a country is not contenting to following any human-rights violating law the majority happens to pass. By your logic, any law implemented through the democratic process cannot be a human rights violation, as long as the citizens had an option to leave the country, since all citizens "consented to the contract" by choosing to stay in the country.
>You seem to have a very very very strange view of what collective consent is.
Terms like "collective consent" are double-speak, and mean exactly the opposite of what they imply. Other terms that fall in this category include "social justice", which blatantly violates justice, and "social contract", which is in no way a contract.