[jmull]

Did "true freedom" exist in the pre-modern world?

If you lived in a social group, you were certainly subject to the group's rules and decisions (laws and government), including rules about contributing to the group (taxes) and most likely would end up owning favors or property to others at times (loans).

If you didn't, you would likely spend the great majority of your time trying to subsist. Well, for a few years until you got sick and then you would die. That might be true freedom to some, but not something I would choose.

[stale2002]

It absolutely existed.

It was perfectly possible to homestead in many parts of the world, and never have to answer to anyone.

It is not possible in the modern world to take some undeveloped land, claim it as your own, and make something out if it.

All land is owned by somebody these days.

[brbrodude]

This question goes deep. You should check out James C. Scott stuff if you really want to broaden this. Your parallels of communities as governments/states/taxes/loans are invalid, IMO. I've ripped audios of a bunch of presentations by him on the topic, do this and see if you'll still frame things the same way, I think not.

[kiliantics]

I think it was definitely more free than now. In those groups, you typically had a voice and direct participation in the decision-making processes of the group. Now, we have the illusion of a choice, and pretty much no control over decisions, which get made by either the giant douche or the turd sandwich