Aye. For that reason, I somewhat agree with LeFevre’s prediction that the state will one day become obsolete and go away. Or as I’d put it - people will realize its obsolescense. I think that a vibrant countereconomy will help that to occur much sooner than it would otherwise, but it will happen someday. As I’ve said before, statism will be removed from the production of law and defense as leeching was removed from the practice of medicine. Although, the ejection will need to be much more forceful at its conclusion, I predict.
I’m afraid the problem is not only with the Left but also with the Classical Liberalism - or the way Classical Liberalism is understood today. Classical Liberalism is generally understood as something like “You may drive as fast as you want but if you hit somebody, you have to pay the damages, so it’s up to you to regulate yourself.”
But I think this is totally different from a Libertarian system properly understood. In a properly understood Libertarian system simply whoever owns the road, sets the speed limit.
In a properly understood Libertarian system there is not guarantee life will be generally more free in the vulgar sense i.e. freedom to do whatever you want. Owners would set their own rules and we cannot really tell how relaxed or how strict those rules would be. Probably UK night clubs would have as annoyingly stiff dress codes as they have today, for example 
This is why I’d emphasize property instead of liberty or freedom.
I consider myself anarcho-capitalist, but I don’t see why things would be all that different.
Keep the “government” in place, just remove its ability to initiate force. In other words, it now becomes voluntarily funded, it can no longer control wages and prices, and it can’t enforce its monopolies. On the other hand, people would still respect basic laws and the main difference would be our (tremendous) economy.
As an aside: how do you define “liberty”?