control people as little as possible

Because you're unfit for civilization: for instance, you would be inept at controlling your children or students if you had any, and thus will only ever be a further contributor to social rot. What fools like you are remarkably adept at doing is taking the failures of people in late-modern societies and declaring them the failures of said societies full stop, rather than realizing that these failures only come about when individuals fail at being social. These problems are resolved by more society, not less.

You're in the position of someone who, experiencing adverse side effects of a medication, decide that those adverse side effects will subside if you take more of it. 'Let us solve social rot by taking it to its natural conclusion, that is, let us dissolve society itself', says Vulptex.

The inability for people to perform their social roles is part and parcel with today's civilizational decline and the growing social disharmony: people whinge and complain because of failed parents, failed teachers, failed law enforcement, failures all across the board. Instead of wishing to increase sociality, you further add to them by wishing to decrease sociality, in which case these failures will only further abound.

in a world that fully controls us

Nonsense. You can find the freedom from society that you seek out in the middle of nowhere. Who would be controlling you there? Out there, only natural forces will control you. Now your kind will, of course, feel that you are enslaved by them too. But there is nothing that you nor anyone else can do about them, and, ironically for your kind, society itself is what has freed Man the most from them. What you mean, of course, is that you wish not to be truly separated from society, but only to engage with it only on your own terms, that is, to become a parasite.

All people can agree that they do not wish to be controlled

Nonsense, and it is absolutely important for all the survival of all collectivities that certain individuals are adept at obeying, and that certain others are adept at controlling. Countless social problems are reducible to people failing to obey those who should control (e.g. children insisting that they know better than their parents, people rejecting medical advice), failing to control those who should obey (e.g. weak parents who pamper their own children), or obeying the wrong authority figures (e.g. idiots taking obvious anti-role models like Andrew Tate or 'Vaush' as role models). Nor is abolishing social groups, as you so desire, possible, since the existence of individuals is impossible without them. An individual only exists as a component of social groups, indeed, he owes his very existence to them, having no education, food nor much of anything else in their absence.

Wanting to arbitrarily control how people live their lives is Palpatine levels of evil.

This mindset is why you idiot Leftists (yes, you libe[retard]ians are absolutely part of the Left) are simply neo-barbarian, caveman types who crave the radical freedom that civilized men rightly discarded when they entered into societies. You're the most regressive people imaginable: you want to undo civilization itself, and all in the name of how nice it would be to experience something as worthless as an unprecedented level of equality and freedom. Neither of which matter to well-adjusted people who do not need anything more than the bare basics of freedom and who despise it when taken beyond them, and who despise equality in particular because the human detritus of the world gain from it wholly at their expense. Adherence to radical freedom and practically any form of equality is always a tacit admission of degeneracy.

My final goal is to

Destroy civilization and return Man to his natural state. Anything else that you might come up with is simply a rationalization of this obvious truth: namely, that you romanticize the hypothetical period in which Man had yet to subject himself to the authority of tribal chiefs and other authority figures, and wish to find some way to synthesize that negative freedom with those modern amenities that people of your ilk have become irreversibly reliant on, that is, to essentially be a high-tech savage. But that will never happen, since Man sacrificing much of his natural freedom to enter into society was necessary for the manufacture of all modern amenities, none of which would nor could exist without society.

Moral men will always seek power, and there is no such thing as morality in power's absence. And if we get control of you, we will issue to your kind an ultimatum: obey us or begone. You had better hope thus that the immoral continue their rule over us all, as seems most likely, or else you will be on the losing end of a societal remoralization that will totally eradicate your worldview: the works of Rand, Rothbard and the rest of your kind will be as if they were never written. They will meet the fate that awaited most of Hirschfeld's.