You can’t advocate an ideology without a solution to the problems at hand. Someone needs to write that software, and that someone needs to be fed and sheltered. It’s also not shameful to want more than staying alive.
The gist is, for different situations different business models can work. If the one you propose works for your software, good for you.
The problem starts when you demand that other business models should not exist, so yours can work.
Aside from the fact that in democracies we regularly oust business models which we believe have dimetral effects on society, this is not what happens here. Free software exists as a choice. And is often chosen freely, because of it's transparency, quality, and continuity, not because of it's price. In fact, when you base your work on a foundation so large that it's infeasible to recreate it, the Four Freedoms actually work in _your_ favor as a business.
The restrictions on business models (imposed by software licenses as a tool) is necessary to preserve the Four Freedoms, which, at least in his view are required to use software ethically. RMS predicted, and accurately as we see, that forgoing these essential Freedoms will create a world where software is used (on us) in an unethical way.