[blackbrokkoli]

Ah, I think your comment made clear to me where my confusion stems from.

I think the problem is that there are actually two meanings for "free" used in this discussion, right?

One is "free" as a positive descriptor of a good society, comparable with words like "equal" etc.

The second one is more like ..."technical" freedom maybe? Total anarchy would be the state of maximum freedom by this definition.

Most people probably desire maximal freedom by the first definition but not the second. And to achieve the first kind (free to live my life like I want for example) the government or some other instance has to cut away freedom from the second definition (forbiding me to prevent other people too live their way, using the same example). So the discussion should rather focus on how much the government shall cut off the second king, because speaking of freedom as a onedimensional scale is obviously confusing - do you agree with that?