size of government and the competence of government

[Jimbean]

I don't know many people who "want large public sectors" for its own sake, that's a straw-man,...

That was not designed to be a straw man fallacy.

...they want effective governance, freedom, quality of life, size is not a singular concern for many people as it is for you. Even the fact that their sweet-spot for government size is bigger than yours does not mean they want "large" public sector, they just want something larger than yours personal ideas about it. And consequently, people that want small government may not have the competency to implement small government and instead inflate the size of government due to mismanagement. This is largely what happens when people who function only based on ideology get in charge.

It may look this way, but this supposed ideology is actually a reflection of reality.

...humans are social animals with identity, which means humans are individuals that form collectives. Many humans want to maintain their identity while being part of a society. How to maintain one's identity and individuality, how to cooperate with others in society are far more important questions than the should or should not. If you don't want to cooperate in society, the system can and often will allow for that especially in modern democracies...

I agree with this so far, but...

however to impose that on the whole of society is not your right or privilege.

I would say that a person does not have the right to use initial force on me to do anything.

If a person needs to do something, a group of people can use social pressure on him or her if he or she is weak minded enough to go along with it, otherwise that person is taking full responsibility for that person.

Why do you laugh at this, ostracization, exile, jail, solitary confinement all isolate the individual from a society. You can also voluntarily choose to leave a society or isolate yourself from society as well. Go join a commune, go live off the land or in the woods, it matters very little to me. However, I do not want to see any such policies implemented as central policy, as that is the form of tyranny. In effect you're advocating the overturning of existing society and forcing everyone to live under one singular philosophical ideal and that being the only way they can live, that is as a definition the face of tyranny. I prefer a society where individuals can debate over the short term management of society based on whatever philosophical ideals they happen to adopt.

Not everyone wants total individualism, not even you, because for you to accomplish your goals, you would need to group with like minded individuals. And that group would come into conflict with other groups which will fight for what they believe in. Winning this political conflict would result in some level of organization, which will seek to perpetuate its existence.

People will socialize because they have the incentive to, or in other words, people socialize from their own sake and not for anyone else. Having a free market economy is not the same thing as social isolation, in fact, it is just the opposite, just like when you facilitate trade by removing restrictions and subsidies.

I haven't heard really any policy changes that would really be implementable from you...

That is because I have not suggested any.