tons of places
In support of this claim you list Liberland (which I recognize as having the potential of being possibly one of the only places, along with the Sea Steading Institute, but it's still just a possibility), Mongolia (not a place many humans want to live), most of Australia (also basically uninhabitable, unless you happen to be an Aborigine and care little about modern quality of life), Russia (might as well also list the North and South poles), and Latin America. Latin America comes close to a rational argument for me, and I have been looking into options like Belize, Chile, Panama, Costa Rica, and the like. Unfortunately, there's still government backed by violence or there's more obvious Mafia-stye enforcement (bribe this group or that group, etc) which I may actually prefer because at least there's no pretense. One could at least argue there's slightly less monopoly use of force going on. I'm looking into it from a "lesser of many evils" perspective.
Morality is subjective because morality is defined by the group
I've discussed morality before and don't think it's as subjective as you see it. Many disagree with me, but I think it's based on where humanity as a whole sits on Maslow's Hierarchy of needs. If morality was subjective, we could create arguments to justify things like rape, murder, and theft. Given the modern realities of our species and where we are on the evolutionary scale of consciousness, I don't think those arguments could be valid. Some things (at this stage in history) are clearly wrong and can not be justified (IMO).
That contract is written on those parametres.
I wish we could use more accurate language because there is no actual contract. No consenting adult agreed to "it" simply by location of birth and where they grew up. I can't think of any valid, enforceable contract that doesn't involve conscious choice by consenting adults. Even the "by signing up, you agree to our terms of service" have some problems in court (and I don't mean "court" in just the legal sense). To me, "the social contract" is a story we tell ourselves to feel better about our current immoral situation.
it is slavery if you HAVE to pay it and they won't let you go.
Try not paying. Try leaving without paying. Try leaving without paying an exit fee. Try arriving somewhere other than Siberia and also not paying. From my perspective, you're telling yourself a story (as we all are), but your story doesn't seem consistent with reality from my perspective. If I'm paying a fee and that fee is not voluntary and if I don't pay the fee, violent force is used against me, that's called extortion. We can call it other things, if we like, but that's what the word means.
I see government as evil because I define it as a monopoly on the initiation of force within a geographic region (rights I believe no one has, so no one can delegate them). If we had social structures which didn't have that specific characteristic and met the needs we have in society, I'd be all about it, and I wouldn't describe it as "government" as I do the State. It would be similar to so many other voluntary organizations we have that do have real contracts like home owner's associations, bowling leagues, boy scouts, etc, etc.
And yes, this is certainly true:
they can be evil or good depending on who is judging them and from what specific scope
We have the arguments we can make and support with evidence. I appreciate being able to voice my views and hear criticisms of them.