Like I said, in no context outside of socialist propaganda, is the external circumstances that involve no violence or threats of it, are considered to make the decisions one makes nonvoluntary.
>>Laws is no objective guide to neither morality nor justice. That's proven by history.
The law here is that voluntary contracts are valid, and no court of your peers would deem a contract involuntary based on the reasoning you're providing, showing your definition of words is unconventional, and thus misleading in the context of ordinary dialogue.
>>If course it is. You can't first create and support the conditions then absolve yourself from what you've created when from people are forced to sell their freedom to you to survive.
1. Employers did not create conditions that limited the options of job applicants.
2. Your claim that people who choose to work for pay are selling their freedom is an inflammatory characterization to falsely portray workers as victims of employers. It's an utterly dishonorable ideological framework that seeks to demonize the successful to rationalize robbing them.
>>What's the lie? Not forced by violence, but forced by the system the propertied support and have a disproportional influence over.
It's a blatant lie that makes the logical leap that not assenting to mass-socialist expropriation is tantamount to depriving others of their legitimate rights.
It's a degenerate claim based on perverse ideological premises.
>>Not really? Withholding necessities to gain power over peoples labour and make a profit is pretty pathologically sociopathic and abolishing that state of affairs is righteous, not robbery.
It's narcissistic of you to claim someone witholding necessities that belong to them, gives you the right to rob them. You believe what others earned belongs to you, and that you have a right to threaten them with violence to coerce them to forfeit it. It's a fundamentally sociopathic outlook.
For all your baseless claims, based on ideological narratives, of employers "forcing" employers to do things, you are the only one here advocating blatant violence and imposition.
This naked robbery you advocate is what all of your mental gymnastics and leaps of logic is intended to rationalize.