I like to explore the concept of self-ownership. My posts on it haven't so far generated much discussion. Do we own ourselves? Should we surrender to the idea that we don't?
Government forces us to do a lot of things and prohibits us from doing a lot of things. Most are at odds with the idea of each of us being a sovereign individual.
There's an explication of the term at Wikipedia with, of course, tons of links to further info.
Given that it is obvious that each of us is born into the assumed benevolent arms of government, which then charges us for its services even if we don't want them (and there's nothing we can do about that except write our Congress(wo)man), then where do we draw the line and call it "sovereignty only beyond this point"?
For the purpose of discussion, let's assume that there are two extremes--anarchy (absence of government) and pure authoritarianism (every action not required is prohibited). All societies hover somewhere between those extremes. Anarchy is an impossibility; someone will always be boss, the 'governor.' North Korea probably has the closest thing to pure authoritarianism of any country, and it's pretty close.
There is always an element of government that wants more authority, and when they get it it's almost never rolled back. Liberty and justice are mined away one chip at a time.