Refuting the logic behind "If you don't like America (or, insert your country here) then leave".

[GooPC]

I think that the person who makes this argument is already assuming that the government has some legitimate jurisdiction over this territory. And then they say, well, now, anyone who is in the territory is therefore agreeing to the prevailing rules. But they’re assuming the very thing they’re trying to prove — namely that this jurisdiction over the territory is legitimate. If it’s not, then the government is just one more group of people living in this broad general geographical territory. But I’ve got my property, and exactly what their arrangements are I don’t know, but here I am in my property and they don’t own it — at least they haven’t given me any argument that they do — and so, the fact that I am living in “this country” means I am living in a certain geographical region that they have certain pretensions over — but the question is whether those pretensions are legitimate. You can’t assume it as a means to proving it.

— Libertarian Anarchism: Responses to Ten Objections

The problem with the “love it or leave it” argument is that it is circular.
The statist is trying to prove that government is justified. Then they assume that government is justified, and say that you can leave if you don’t like it. So they just assume what they are trying to prove.
In other words…

1-Government is justified
2-If you don’t like it, you can move to a different country
3-Therefore, government is justified.

That’s statist logic for you!

— Sage