A license is permission to do something that is otherwise illegal. This is a basic definition found in any legal dictionary. As such, licenses and permits are proof that something remains illegal, not that freedom has been recognized. Legality does not define morality or reason, so any claims to legal authority are open to question and bear the burden of proof in any rational debate.
Licenses are proof of governmental overreach. If governments claim ownership of territories of land and the residents therein, then such claims are clearly usurpation and trespass. Even if governments exercise authority granted by the people through the "democratic process" as is taught in civics lessons in school, then the claim of authority to grant permission is still a usurpation since we as individuals already have the authority to make such determinations of permissibility already.
But don't licenses protect us from dishonest businessmen, dangerous drivers, hazardous buildings, or other risks? No. Licenses only protect the license holder from some of the threats of governmental violence. Refusing to beg for permission from your masters may result in theft, battery, or kidnapping under color of law.
The activist must analyze the risks and rewards of living as a free individual in a world that hides tyranny so poorly behind the illusion of liberty. Live free, but cover your ass. Only you can gauge the risk/reward values of acting like you have real liberty in any given situation.
Until you see the chains, you don't know you are not free. If you never try to reach past the bars of your cage, you never know that you are imprisoned.