Hive account@jaredhowe

I agree with he basic premises you are bringing forward but you have to consider two basic truths.

1. Statists believe that what we have right now is consent. A large group of people on the face of this earth, bounded by imaginary borders agrees to a given set of ethos. Morality is subjective. We need to accept this. They accept violence as part of morality. In the same way you would accept violence as moraliuty in case you are defending yourself. The only difference is that some people, eg statists, are trigger happy with their safety.

2. Lets say goverments fall. Then what? Groups of people will still clumb together and fight over resources. Have you ever been hungry. I mean 3-4 days hungry. I have. You have no idea what it does to you until you experience it. Most people on this earth engaging in conflict have morality shaped from these conditions. Wars exist because some group of people say they defend some other group of people.

Imagine you belong to an anarchist group in a post apocalyptic no-goverment era. You are called to defend another group of people who got attacked because kids are killed and women raped. What do you do? Do you engage in war? Do you stay there doing nothing? What if you engage in war and people die as collateral?

These questions are not easy nor can be answered unless you have been through some tough situations. Being a couch anarchist from a comfy western culture, philosophysing about the world, does't change anything.