Consent is only valid when it is fully informed.

“Fully informed” sounds absolute, but in practice nobody is ever fully informed about the consequences of a decision. You can be informed about what you know, but you cannot possess every relevant fact, hidden motive, future consequence, or unintended effect. If that's the case then consent never existed and never will. So if valid consent requires complete knowledge, virtually nothing qualifies as consent.

Not knowing what's happening consciously doesn't mean you're not still participating in the system or helping it keep going.

Don't be blaming the victims.

I'm not saying victims are morally responsible for being deceived. I'm saying that lack of conscious awareness doesn't mean the mechanism isn't operating through you.

If every participation in the system can be explained as something you were forced into, then what would ever count as consenting to it? If nothing can count as consent because there is always some circumstance, conditioning, need, fear, dependency or lack of information behind it, then what exactly are we calling consent in the first place?