The boundaries of ’liberty’ are clearly and well seen when one reaches upon the thought that any one object, sensation, or feeling, if being called a liberty, itself drive the boundaries of this so-called ‘liberty’ onwards, and do not assist in extinguishing the flame of burdens, but rather serve as places from which the radiance of liberty is cast forward only to shine against the darkness of the night in assurance that wherever a concept of liberty has developed there also exists the notion of imprisonment, and by that the word liberty in itself encloses a space and thereby leaves it not free in any notion or state of will. This is likewise confirmed by that there cannot exist a notion of liberty if there is no form of entanglement from which one could be liberated – to be free, one first needs to be held back.
If this is to be reassured by an example of sorts then one only has to envision that a man of a free society, which knows no borders or limits to itself or its abilities, if one such can indeed exist, would have no concept of either liberty, for there is nothing but liberty, nor of imprisonment, to an enclosed unit of thoughts, wishes, desires, actions, or movements, for such a thing would be an impossibility in their society. If this man would now happen to meet a man of the modern society, and he would be asked what are his liberties in his life and existence, then he would have no opportunity to answer, because nothing in that life is a liberty insofar as it is already something taken for granted, thereby losing the illustrious image of a liberty. So, the man would, in all likelihood, say “Could you pray tell, what is this ‘liberty’?”
This is what I wrote on this interesting question some time ago.