bits are not collections

Sometimes it is frustrating to see people talk about society. But it would be less frustrating, and more productive, if some simple lessons were learned.

There is a common failure to distinguish between the realm of the personal and the realm of the public.
In personal terms (using the language, concepts, values, experience of individuality) there may be no danger in drinking in public parks, or in cars, or in the streets, or in laundromats.
However, in public terms (using the language, concepts, values, experience of groups) there is clear danger in allowing people to get drunk in all those places. The accumulated public experience is clear - and as a result of that clarity, rational people got together and passed laws to regulate behavior that was judged to be the source of problems.
Here is a question that must be asked - by young people as they start to become adults, by thinkers as they expand their world to include others - WHAT would happen if EVERYONE did what I was doing? That question must be asked and answered by people making public policy.
The answers to questions about public behavior are completely different from the answer to the question about one person.

Examples:
What would happen if everyone hired illegal aliens?
What would happen if every employer of illegal aliens made them slaves by keeping them locked up at night and threatening them with deportation?
What would happen if everyone drove an Excursion that gets 12 mpg?
What would happen if everyone cheated on their taxes?
What would happen if all the engineers cheated on their exams and ended up building bridges that were bound to fall apart in ten years?
What would happen to public health if everyone refused to get checked or quaranteed when there was an epidemic?

Formulate a scenario where one or two people do the above.
Then formulate the probable scenario if ten million people did any of the above.
Then formulate what outcomes would result if half a billion people did one of these things.
Every time you increase the scale of the question, the fundamental nature of the answer will be transformed.

A dilemma for the libertarian and individualist - when trying to push into the realm of society - is conflict.
Sorry dude, not everyone thinks like you do. And differences of thinking, of values, of priorities, of abilities, of communication are problems that arise pretty quickly once your social circle gets bigger than just yourself.
Whatever you may say personally about any behavioral issue may have nearly nothing to do with what other people say about the same issue. And if you and they are in the same system, the fact that you see and define the issue in incompatible ways is an issue. While you may be able to function personally based on your idea of the issue, you cannot function socially when other people have different ideas on the same issue.

Groups of things act according to laws (patterns) that are completely different from the way single things act.
The way ONE animal functions during its little life will not tell you very much about how the species functions.
The way one computer functions is incomparable to the way a network of computers functions. One should not be used as a model of the other.
A bone cell in isolation is nothing like a bone cell in maturational context. Or brain cell, or skin cell.
When you write a page, that will not tell you much about writing a novel.
Spending one day with a person and then thinking that you can predict how it might be to spend years with that person would be a huge mistake.

Whatever can be accurately or constructively said about illegal aliens on a personal basis has pretty much nothing to do with talking rationally about immigration on a public level. When people try to mix the levels, it is jumbled nonsense.
Examples of nonsensical confusion of topics are when people:  
think about one meal in terms of a diet, or vice versa,
think about today's weather as if it were climate change, or vice versa,
think going to school is going to educate them,
think that war is going to make them safe,
confuse sports with sportscasting,
confuse reading a novel with reading the blurb on the back of the novel,  
confuse a single measurement with statistics,
confuse an experiment with science,
confuse sentence structure with grammar,
can't tell the difference between taking a drug and drug addiction,
can't tell the difference between a band and a genre,
can't tell the difference between an opinion and a philosophy,
can't tell the difference between a candidate and a party.  

If you are going to deal with systems, you had better start thinking systematically. A grain of sand may act one way, but a beach acts in completely different ways.

The failure to distinguish between the social and the personal shows up in confusion about what REAL things there are in the world. When talking about social things, public things, group things, talk in personal terms will not work. And when talking about personal things, words in the language of the personal won't work.
What works between a handful of people most of the time does not work when the number of people increases. If you move in structure from a family to a neighborhood to a town, pretty soon all the rules have to be changed. You cannot talk face to face any more, there are time and scheduling conflicts, you encounter a lot more variety and conflict, costs change, needs change, tools change.
In the context of making and selling things, it is important for an entrepreneur to recognize the difference between a small scale and the big scale. While I may be able to make a widget for a dollar and sell it for two on a small scale, it may turn out (yikes) totally impossible to scale that up. Perhaps the widget takes too much time to make, and making fifty thousand of them requires that you give up the way you made them when you were selling a hundred per month.
Running a home business, and running a small business and running a large business are very different things. Scaling up does not work. The way a small business does things has a completely different logic to it than the way a large business must function. Everyone in business knows this, and respects it.
A home school is not going to function like a church school, which in turn is not going to function like a public school in a small town, which is never going to function like a big school in a big town. Shifting up the size scale requires (at certain points) total re-engineering of process.

Foundational assumption to libertarianism is that whatever works on the personal level will work on the public level.
That is an assumption easily and quickly proven wrong when anyone begins to seriously examine history, politics, social structure, culture, law or organizations.
Sorry. you can still believe that stuff about how the world would be a better place if everyone acted just like you, but
it would not ever have any basis in fact.