My take as an anti-collectivist is that 'social anarchy' is the ideal - complete chaos. And I've never met any 'liberty'-lover or anarchist who would go along with that, because most folks are collectivists, and are afraid of social anarchy.
I have recently encountered fresh road kills by valiant liberty fighters who cannot comprehend that there is anything wrong with society, the clan, the collective - only with the State. As though the Borg without the State is all innocent bliss, like hippies disconnecting concepts from reality and vice versa. At this stage, I just blink - at a total loss - which is what remains ... a total loss ... Borgs ... civilized folks ... you know, Borgs. Ah, funk it, man.
I just about fell down and died from laughter when I tangled with Mark Davis' idealistic essay, Organizing Society, at Strike-the-Root: "The advantage that anarchists have over statists is that the state needs society, while society doesn’t need the state."
Mein Gott! Mark. The clan is the source of the State - needs it desperately; generates it in a vacuum; can't leave home without it.
"... doesn't need the state." *ROTFLMAO*
Sorry, kiddo. You're being fed a line, and you're buying it - and you're reciting it like a good pupil. You're not alone.
Did no one bother to take Anthem seriously? I mean, granted, Atlas Shrugged is a cartoon, but Rand did a few things well (like the first edition of We the Living, 1936, and Anthem). I don't know what to say. (And it doesn't matter what I say, does it?)
Once groups get power, it is very unlikely that their members will ever again have the ability to see that the group - their own group/culture - is the major roadblock to their personal liberty, health, and well-being. On every side, they are told that their society/culture is the source of these things. They are lied to, yes. But in consequence of cultural conditioning, they are very unlikely to be able to see the lie, nor even to see the need for the boundaries of liberty (certainly not for their culture, which strikes them as perfectly benign and peaceable, even as it enslaves them). - [Handbook for Liberty, p. 17]
But, okay, it is probably important to understand that no one wants liberty, because liberty is anti-collectivist. Liberty is inherently pro-individualist - stringently so - and this is not a philosophy that anyone is familiar with (being good little Borgs). You will seldom encounter more entrenched and defensive collectivists than amongst the libertarians. Hence their built-in rejection of liberty. But this is true of any other group, as well. Anarchists positively hate liberty; they are true believers in the power and salvation of collectivism. (Their closest political cousin is Socialism, for Chrissake!)
That being said, what hope is there of liberty for this species? Absolutely none at all. Is this pessimistic or cynical? No, just realistic. Folks don't want it. Are not sociologically equipped to handle it. They are, as Mark Davis pointed out, 'civilized,' and this means they are lost. The natural, logical consequences of this condition must be thoroughly played out and an end-game condition be reached, before entities capable of utilizing liberty will arrive on the scene. This is very much like a wildlife documentary on the species: wholly predictable in their cycles of growth and decay, similar to lemmings, but distinct. (And not differentiated upon anything so bizarre as a capacity for rational thought! Dear no.)
Of course, people individually do not want the end-game condition to be reached, and they stretch the bounds and bonds of reason in excessive ways, such as to conclude that pigs can fly, that night is day, that 9/11 was perpetrated by foreigners, and that liberty is just around the corner (hang in there!). But, of course: not. And you know this if your brain functions. Civilized brains are Borg-empathic, and no longer function as independent units. I am not responsible for this observation; it is simply an observation. Pigs can't fly. (I'm sorry; don't shoot the messenger.)
Wherever you live on this planet, Jo, you are laboring under one systemic delusion or another (as your ongoing explorations are constantly proving to you). Peel that onion long enough and you discover that there never was no onion. Another delusion, perhaps. When you can no longer communicate well enough to reach the Borg, when you are on what feels like dangerously unstable and shaky ground, then you are approaching reality. Very, very few people will proceed at this point; most will rush back to the security of the clan (or be brought back on a stretcher).
And it's kinda funny, cuz if you do proceed, the issue/problem of liberty becomes irrelevant, indeed, all of the comparative 'civilized' standards become irrelevant. Because, if you disconnect (God forbid!), the survival of the collective no longer has any meaning to you - it simply does not matter to a disconnected, independent mind. There have been a few, rare individuals who have not fought for liberty, but simply 'taken' it. We scarcely have their stories ... they disconnected and disappeared from the civilized collective. They found that they could no longer communicate to the Borg ... there was no motivation for them to do so, indeed, they felt relief (at long last).
Now, I know that you, Borg-dependent and fearful, want to know what happened to these guys ... like where are they, for one thing, and are they, um, all right? (How considerate your concern is.) But there is no answer to that. Maybe they're all dead. Maybe they became street people. Maybe they all became physicists. Maybe they moved to Columbia or Afghanistan and became drug lords. As far as the collective is concerned: they might as well be dead. I don't think there's any comfort in that answer. But comfort of the clan is precisely what doesn't exist beyond the clan - civilization drops away and you suddenly know what it's like to encounter the edge of the world, falling away into nothingness - a cliff's edge, falling in darkness into the stars. There be monsters here. (Kewl, huh?)
Science fiction writers, those imaginative, civilized Borg members who are communicating quite fluently to the rest of the clan, have no idea what happened to these independent guys. They postulate on two theories, one is framed as a warning against leaving the collective (a staple ingredient), and the other is an 'A is not A' wish-fulfillment fantasy ... independence collectively enjoyed (ah, what bliss ... like an orgy of validation). Whatever 'news' you are getting from within the Borg is supportive of the collective, even those who unwittingly and witlessly rail against the collective ... as long as they are still coherent, they are still supporting the collective and trying to sustain the delusions of the Borg.
I promise that you will have a mental meltdown if you actually go into this arena and attempt to separate out reality from delusion. Your mind is already so badly mucked, and your grasp of reality is already so warped, that actually apprising yourself of reality will send you around the bend. (Which is really just around the corner.) No matter who you are, where you are, or how well connected you are, your mind has a collective brand seared into its neural wiring, and you are wired to defend the clan above your own well-being.
Now, there are a class of humans, humorously described by Tom Robbins in his novel Still Life with Woodpecker: the outlaws, who are lubricously anti-social and disconnected - yet, wondrously, functional (er, dysfunctional, you Borgs would say). Of course, Robbins, who writes with awesome power, is clearly part of the Borg and treasures his placement. And his outlaws are entertaining and have unusual but enjoyable lives - within the Borg.
These are not the people who have stepped off the edge of the planet, where there is no longer any Borg, and it no longer matters to play with, taunt, tease, or terrorize the clan. The people who have stepped off the edge of the planet are outlaws, perhaps, but beyond your power to imagine - and beyond the power of anyone to communicate. From within the clan, they may strike us as 'outlaws.' But from their perspective, there is no relationship; the word is nonsense to them.
Now your mind is clicking ... for some really esoteric mind control game, like zen buddhism or transcendentalism or some such. These are interesting experimentations with the powers of the mind, but like martial arts, these have nothing to do with your social conditioning into a collective. Nor the 'cold-fish' lawyer types who have no 'feelings' for your particular situation (these are so intensely Borgified entities, they would drop dead instantly if you took away their power or unplugged them).
No, the folks who 'take liberty,' and who walk off the edge of the planet, are no longer interested in interacting with the 'civilized' clan, not even to argue, not even for survival ... not even for amusement (what could possibly be less amusing than dealing with humanoid retards?). The clan has nothing - at all - to hold them hostage to the clan. They have zip interest in whether the clan survives or not. Does not affect them. Is not their responsibility. They carry no debt; wear no leash.
Forget it. You don't know anyone like that. All you know is the clan. The collective. The Borg. Yes, I am still amused ... that you think, in your remotest fantasies, that you could possibly be fit for liberty, or that you even want it. Ha, ha, ha, ha.
Amused. And not too likely to go walking off the edge of the planet any time soon. (Hey, the planet is round, remember! Hah! Jeez, what a bunch of nonsense. It's round. It is circular! There is no outside. Huh?)