I had a non-standard interpretation of the Borg I think. I interpret them as critical of scifi fans specifically. People who don't understand nor care about any of Star Trek's philosophical or social points. In the first two instances of the Borg, they don't assimilate people. They only care about technology to build the most efficient space stuff. They steal a big chunk of the Enterprise and their scout only cares about studying the Enterprise's engines and he completely ignores the crew.

They're a satire of the type of scifi fan who gets into the tiny details of scifi technology, like how the teleporters work or how cool the spaceship is. The original Borg don't care at all about culture, or social progress, or humanity. They have no humanity. They're machine people with no will of their own who just want to tinker around with toys. Star Trek's got stuff to say, maybe sometimes in a very hamfisted or cheesy way, but it has a genuinely optimistic view on humanity and how things could progress. The Borg are a dim view of some Star Trek fans, who only care about advanced technology in spite of anything else.

I think later writers didn't go after this, but it's such a good contrast. The technologically advanced but socially absent Borg versus the less technology advanced but very humane Enterprise. Later Star Trek uses the Borg just as like evil drones or a stand in for dictatorship or something, they became a vague set of negative character traits, or just the plot device of a faceless enemy that you can't reason with. Star Trek has had a lot of writers and they don't all share ideology. Probably a few of the more lib types see the Borg as a metaphor for socialism (it's not a good one though)