Freedom, Self-Control, Reason

At the heart of Ethics, IV, lxxiii, "The man, who is guided by reason, is more free in a State, where he lives under a general system of law, than in solitude, where he is independent", is the contrast between 'free' and 'independent'.  Seemingly identical, by 'freedom', Spinoza means 'self-control', while, as is more patent in the context, by 'independence', he means 'isolation'.  Implicit in the contrast is an analysis almost unrecognizable in American 'individualism'--that social independence does not entail Self-Control, e. g. intemperate, pre-conditioned, and even violent behavior are routinely classified as 'free' in American society.  Likewise, law-abidingness out of fear is not 'free' in Spinoza's sense of the term.  For, only conduct guided by Reason entails Self-Control, and, so, it is only insofar as law-abidingness is an expression of Rationality that it is truly 'free' conduct, as Kant develops a century later.  Conversely, Rationalism, in general, is alien to even the collectivist strains of the predominant American ethos, which are mediated by Sympathy, not by Reason, and, hence, entail Self-Control no more than do the individualist ones.