In general I agree with you. With your vision of where to go to be free and what that means. But then does it exist any 2 individuals that agree on everything? ;)
I would say that everything is possible, to call it an illusion that something is possible is to limit what is possible. The better way to put it I think is to say it may not be probable within a given time frame.
You mention energy technologies as if there does not yet exist better ways. But some research will tell you that it does, but not yet supported and is suppressed. But research is done on small scales and some have made and is using them in small communities.
Lastly; you write: "One can be in a cage and be free as long as what they do within the confines and with the resources available to them is at their own volition"
How can you call that freedom, when the cage clearly restricts your movement and thus actions.? Unless you chose to walk inside the cage by your own volition. This is true even by analogy. To have some freedoms is not to be free. Then you could say even slaves and prisoners is free. But then the word looses its meaning.
What one could ask however, is this: Is someone free that is not aware of the walls that restricts them? And is it moral to inform them about the walls?
As things within th greater system, we are always limited in some way as we are unable to ever take up all space pr know all things in an expanding system. But, to return to earth a little, when it comes to human oppression, freedom is still in the mind and we are all absolutely free to act/think, imagine within our constraints. People limit freedom to mean freedom to do what one wants, that is an illusion as, it is never possible.
If the walls do not restrict them in what they do with what they have, are they relevant? If they do not see the walls and are not restricted in themselves by the walls, how will you show them?If you inform them and if they do see the walls and now feel restricted, are you a tyrant for enslaving them?
There seems to be some confusion and asumptions at play here. Im aiming at the idea of "things" that have an effect on virtually everyone, but that most are not aware of effecting them. So yes the walls do restrict then but the awareness of that restriction isnt there. Meaning; if they was aware of the walls, and the once who are aware of them, do not have to option of doing or interacting with what is behind the walls. As then force and/or the threat of force would be used agaisnt us. Does this make the question more clear?
Here is one analogy: Awareness of the wall: its a glass wall and you see whats on the other side and want to explore it.
None awareness of the wall: The wall is a tall black scary looking one that have always been there, so you dont even know if there is anything on the other side.
In regards to what it seems to me, is your concept of freedome; You, as a prisoner or as a slave knowing you was one, regards yourself as 100% free, because you was free to think, do and act within the constraints of the prison or slave owner.
There is a diference between freely waling into limitation, and unwilingly being lead or forced into it. And to tie it a little together; if you have been blinded by walls of "I dont have a choise", is that then to be free and to make that "choise" yourself?
Lastly; It may be, however that ther eis a seperate point you wish to point out with how you word things. And im here too focused on the point im making with my questions. And the oposite may also be true, that you cant see the point im making. So yes, if the walls or conceptual prison does in no way restrict someone, then there is no reason to make them aware of it existing. But that is not what I am basing my question on.. My goal is merely understanding, not to shoot the messenger :)