Elections aren't an election of anyone's consent to be governed.

You are free not to use any of the services offered by society to you, which obviously requires leaving the country.

You are not free to leave the country, unless you are willing to spend your time in between borders. Many people are not as privileged as you are, for example I need a visa to go anywhere in the world. And the elections may seem like freedom, but usually you have to choose between multiple sides of the same evil :P </rant>

You are usually free to leave your country (the GDR likely being one of the few exceptions…), but other societies obviously have the right to reject you entry into their countries. And if you don’t like the choices you have at your elections, nominate yourself.

> You are free not to use any of the services offered by society to you, which obviously requires leaving the country.

You are free to avoid me killing you. Just leave your house and never come back so I can live in your house in peace. Ridiculous logic.

Ah, yes, the old Don't want to be nannied from cradle to grave? Well, here's your ticket to Somalia! routine. One of my all-time favorite thought-stopping arguments.

> The nation I'm a citizen of has a government that renews the consent of the government on a regular basis with free, fair, universal elections.

At best, that just renews the consent of those who do consent. If I didn't vote, or voted for the losing candidate or option, then I am still governed despite not consenting.

"Consent of the governed" refers to consent of the polity (by some form of majoritarian process), not to individual consent. Individuals do not have the unrestricted option to remove themselves from society; universal consent is unnecessary, unworkable, and undesirable.

> "Consent of the governed" refers to consent of the polity (by some form of majoritarian process), not to individual consent.

That's precisely my point. It's a linguistic trick to make it sound like an exchange is justified despite there not actually being consent. The analogy would be Apple forcefully taking x hundred dollars from you, giving you an iPhone, then saying the exchange is justified because 50.1% of the smartphone market consensually buys iPhones. (I made up that number, obviously.)