I think it is more fundamental.

There is no such thing as absolute, 'unabridged' liberty. People making 'liberty' the foundation of an ideology must pick and choose certain aspects of life that they think should be granted a privileged place in a 'just' society — just like people supporting all other ideologies must do. (For instance, the existence of private property constrains liberty, but no Libertarian has ever questioned the 'necessity' of private property for a 'just' society — and in 'communism', after all, as envisioned by Marx, "the state" would "wither away," not that I'm a commie.)

Such judgements are always (from the point of view of any other person) arbitrary--which makes imposing them on other people in a way that does not allow for any recourse or change is unjust, tyrannical, etc. That is why every ideology contains within it a seed of totalitarianism.

Preventing any ideology from gaining a totalitarian status is one of the many great virtues of having a democratic political process as an end in itself.

[If curious about more on the issue of property, there is "Finding One Way Forward" (here in Medium, but not behind the paywall).]