Basically in a healthy society with their rights all available and with Islam as its foundation you won't feel the need to control them as they would be the best example even if not perfect this isn't the afterlife after all.

Also the only place in Qur'an where there is limitation of speech was for Muslims to be punished if they accuse a Muslim woman of sexual deviance without proof (Qathf قذف). There are verses God telling us how to deal with those who hurt us with their speech against God and Islam, etc with patience and in another verse that we shouldn't sit with them when they talk like that until they talk different (probably for possibility of dawa still but usually when people go to bad fatih speech you shouldn't even bother with reasoning with them just remind them of the ultimate truth of the afterlife that's laid out in another verse i forgot where) Also that the prophet pbuh never killed or punished anyone for becoming non Muslim in front of him even like the one who said be just o Muhammad, and the ones who used to cuss him or insult him, also the jews who used to say God's hands are chained (but actually they're the ones who will be).

Islamic libertarianism in other words Medina Constitution of the Prophet pbuh and its najran treaty amendment and the abu ubaydah levant treaties examples, but all mainly based on the Qur'an as there are often ignored or downplayed foundational verses such as no compulsion in deen(ideology/worldview not just the simple english word religion) other verses such as لست عليهم بمصيطر told to the prophet pbuh, and others such as amongst the believers... consultation in their affairs.. ,etc and another verse to the prophet pbuh and consult them in the affair, the fact that the prophet pbuh was given bay'ah (vote) by the majority of medina, then later votes by other regions after they came into the fold not by aggression but by repelling aggression and giving the people choice, they had their own representatives delegates called عرفاء or نقباء and the prophet pbuh had عمال workers literally but meaning governors but they were under the choice of the people's of the region or city, etc. A lot of verses which are ignored you would find entire fiqh works ignoring these verses and building whole other structures based on historical states/empires or in that time fiqh being made based on what they lived and they would find whatever fits that narrative from weak hadiths and misunderstanding a few verses contradictory to the most clear verses about no compulsion, no aggression, no domination, consultation aka democracy but in the muslim context would be theodemocracy as per the verses sovereignty is to God not the people but there is no agent of God even the prophet pbuh was elected and told to not dominate and wasn't king, etc. It would be basically an immigration based Islamic theodemocratic(people vote for what they think is according to Qur'an and prophetic tradition or not contradictory to it not a church like structure having scholars be the dictators as it never was the prophetic way nor Qur'anic) decentralized society bottom up the power is truly with the people and would have a federal/confederation type union with members either federal (islamic and tightly integrated with the constitution) or confederate members(islamic or non Muslim members whether groups or individuals, etc) multi laws and decentralized judicial system based on agreements and collaboration everything is voluntary participation based not coerced or enforced of course whoever doesn't participate in society like zakat/jizya and shared natural resources would be not a member of this union and would not benefit from it as succession is a God given natural right complete self determination and rights and properties, borders, etc to be negotiated in courts agreed upon, etc. Aggression though is always met with complete and utter force as is the Islamic system basically capital punishment for any deadly violent aggression such as armed robbery, rape, kidnapping, premeditated murder, any war act that would be in the voted upon court in the place where the crime happened for example, the right to bear arms and defend yourself and others. You don't need to think in the central way of thinking to see how people would live peacefully and have their issues resolved amongst eachother for example the verse about returning the issues amongst us to be resolved to God or the prophet pbuh aka Qur'an and authentic non Qur'an contradictory sunnah and to أولي الأمر منكم to the people responsible of your affairs from amongst you these can be judges we elected or the governors we elect or if the matter needs to go higher up the decentralized chain to the leader of the federation (country) which should be reasonably liquid democracy with the loopholes plugged people having immediate veto on their votes or delegates and revolution and militia rights as was the army of the prophet pbuh with the tribes militias everyone with their own banners under the ultimate banner of the prophet pbuh aka the union as is obvious in his saheefa-tul-madinah https://github.com/IslamicRevival/Tajdeed-English-Books/blob/main/Saheefah%20-%20(MadinaConstitution)%20-%20Draft.pdf https://github.com/IslamicRevival/Tajdeed-English-Books/blob/main/Hijrah%20-%20Arabic-English-%20Complete-draft%20v1-07-2023.pdf

Modern state is not the solution, more controlling people and micromanagement is not the solution even the prophet pbuh was told لست عليهم بمصيطر (you're not to dominate over them).