Would We Fight To The Death?

In Sartre’s philosophy, we learned that he believed that people have a certain freedom that can never be taken away and is so overcoming in human beings that if we were to be challenged by another “freedom” we would be willing to fight to the death for it because humans are in a constant struggle for recognition.  That being said, there comes a point in this “freedom vs. freedom fight” that the weaker person taps out and becomes the slave of the master, who is then the stronger one.  It is in that very moment that the master is truly recognized as a freedom and the slave is unfortunately, not.  This to me seems to be a contradiction of sorts.  If humans are so passionate about being a freedom that they are willing to lay down their very lives for its sake, then why would a free person really ever “tap out”?  If humans were really and truly willing to fight to the death on this, the weaker freedom would not even accept the fate of becoming a slave and in a sense giving up the right to call himself or herself a freedom.  Even though the slave is indeed still a freedom because that person has the ability to be free (even if he or she is only free in his or her mind); the “free slave” does not get the freedom to stand up to its master and say “Hey! I am a free being! You need to recognize me as such!”  No, they must deny being recognized as a freedom in fear of being hurt by the more powerful master.  I am sure there is a logical explanation for this hole in Sartre’s philosophy and I would really like to know what that explanation might be.