Isn't this just a false dichotomy in web comic form? Implying that there are only two options, full participant or complete withdrawal from society, as a means of suggesting that one cannot apply morals to how one chooses to engage with society.

But in reality, there are many many ways to engage in society, some more or less ethical/moral than others, and one is free to criticize individual choices.

Even if we consider something like social media, there is still a range of choices other than fully engaging in social media and rejecting all social media. There are attempts to use it responsible, limiting and curating use to less harmful versions while attempt to get most of the benefit, while still postulating that the overall effect of the average use case of social media is harming society.

It feels a lot like saying that, since it is impossible to live a perfectly ethical/moral life, ethics and morals can be completely ignored without regard for what options one does have available to them.

The comic is pointing out how absurd that false dichotomy is.

GP comment was basically verbatim from first 2 panel, with slaves replaced with decent wages.

Point being, you can complain about thing, even if you are forced to interact with said thing.