My opinion is that anarchists view of human nature is too optimistic. We need police to try and solve murders and deter lawbreaking. I'm not making the claim they are 100% successful, I'm making the claim that police reduce crime, despite making mistakes.
When a natural disaster hits texas, help is sent from Washington. We don't vote on that first, its something 'we' expect the government to do.
Your thing about the 49% V the 51% isn't the way at least a majority look at it. If my party loses the election, I don't suddenly believe I'm being governed against my will, I think the opinions I voted for lost.
I'd say if anarchism had a shot it'd be in tiny hippy communes, but even then I think if there was no democrassy a strongman would take over.
I don't think the United States has the best possible government, in theory there are better systems, however I think it should be recognized that governing systems change, our government was a reaction to what came before, as was England going from an absolutist monarchy to the constitutional republic it is today.
It seems like what you folks want to do is tear down society while not admitting the possibility this distruction could go horribly wrong.
I think it is significant you would not be allowed to have this conversation in NorthKorea.
Furthermore, just for the sake of argument, grant me that 95% of United States citizens are satisfied with this form of government. Maybe not these current polititions, but the system in general is something they are happy with. If this was true, how would you justify changing the way we are governed?.