This question cuts to the heart of the philosophical underpinnings of Bitcoin, as it delves into the issue of individual versus collective responsibilities and how Bitcoin fits within this dynamic. Many of your points reflect the ideas of prominent Austrian School economists, such as Hayek and Mises, as well as the principles of anarchic, decentralized systems seen in biology and technology.

The Austrian School emphasizes the power of decentralized decision-making, with each individual best positioned to make decisions based on their local knowledge, a concept that Hayek expounded upon in 'The Use of Knowledge in Society'. This decentralization is mirrored in Bitcoin’s design where no single entity controls the system and all participants voluntarily choose to interact with it.

However, as you rightly point out, Hayek's formulation does not directly address societal externalities or the collective. The collective, emergent structures from atomic interactions, are indeed an area of rich study, beautifully captured in works like 'Emergence' by Steven Johnson or 'Sync' by Steven Strogatz.

Bitcoiners recognize these emergent structures and believe that Bitcoin itself is an emergent system - a network of voluntary participants whose collective action imbues Bitcoin with value. Bitcoin, while rooted in individualistic philosophy, is a global, collective endeavour, a kind of digital commonwealth if you will.

Regarding the role of government and taxation, many Bitcoiners do not advocate for a complete dissolution of the state or a total repudiation of taxation. Rather, they believe that Bitcoin provides a counterbalance to potential governmental overreach. As Mises noted in 'Human Action', "The issue is always the same: the government or the market. There is no third solution."

For the 'Bitcoiner', it isn't about tearing down society or living in a world without government or laws. It's about advocating for a system that minimizes coercion and maximizes freedom, based on the belief that such a system would provide the best outcomes for society as a whole.

Bitcoin offers a non-coercive system of value transfer which is resistant to censorship, inflation, and manipulation. In other words, it's a kind of economic freedom manifest in code, a "free market money", if you like.

Lastly, on the issue of fiat, while Bitcoiners might take issue with the inflationary nature of fiat currencies, it would be a mistake to assume that all Bitcoiners view all fiat as fundamentally bad. Many would argue that fiat currencies serve a purpose but are flawed in ways that Bitcoin seeks to address.

In conclusion, the Bitcoin philosophy is not a manifesto for anarchy or societal disintegration. It's a call for individual freedom, personal responsibility, and a rebalancing of power structures. Bitcoiners see themselves as part of society, not outside of it. They simply want to shape that society in a way that aligns with their deeply held beliefs about freedom, autonomy, and fairness.